‘I hasten to add that I regard this as an assumption, no more. You cannot prove it.’
‘But surely it can be falsified. Just think of all the people who display anything but greatness. If we began to catalogue all the forms of the littleness of human nature we should be here for aeons,’ commented the young chief executive.
‘Yes, it’s a form of D’Abernet’s Paradox again. We are both great and little. It’s a strange mixture. Sometimes the greatness struggles against the other side, our littleness. It’s an assumption – and act of faith – to believe that the greatness is foremost. Without it necessarily being a piece of conscious philosophy, leaders worth the name do believe in people – they trust them, have faith in them – and it is this belief that is the first step to drawing out the hidden greatness in people.
‘The people really barred at the door of leadership are those misanthropists who hold a low opinion of people in general. A cynic, for example, is contemptuously distrustful of human nature and motives, and would sneer at any suggestion that such things as sincerity or nobility exist.’
‘When I took over as a factory manager – my first job as an operational leader – I was pretty sceptical about people,’ said the young chief executive. ‘My policy to others was quite simple: prove to me that you are reliable and trustworthy, then I shall trust you. It was my experiences with Steve Down that changed me.’
‘Can you tell me about that?’ I asked.
‘Just before I came into the job my predecessor briefed me about “the Problem”, as he called it. The “Problem” proved to be one Steve Down, a 44-year-old manager who was the classic under-performer and a gloom-merchant as well. Nothing and nobody was ever right for him. “Down by name, Down by nature”, colleagues said of him.
‘Initially, and probably understandably, I was seduced into this paradigm of Steve. For that first few months I would climb all over his back, making sure that he worked the hours that I thought he should work and gave the effort I and the organization thought he should give. Then, having reflected upon the reasons why these attempts at influencing him were failing, I decided as an experiment to change the way I viewed him. It was like taking off one pair of glasses and putting on another that were rose tinted.’
‘What effect did it have?’
‘To begin with there was no change. The lesson for me then was to learn to be patient – not my strongpoint. The change in Steve over the next year, however, not only astounded me but amazed all his colleagues – even his wife, as I heard much later. At 44 he seemed to suddenly discover his life and became incredibly ambitious and hugely positive. When I first took over he announced to me that he never wanted to leave Liverpool, where our plant was. Then one day he came to me saying that he and his wife had decided to pursue a career in our Training Department, which was based in Windsor. You can imaging the satisfaction I enjoyed.
‘It taught me that the key foundation stone for all good leaders is to have an enormous belief in their people. Furthermore, I believe that this can be taught. And once this foundation stone is in place, it is possible to teach every other aspect of effective leadership. So the world can produce the leaders it needs – we do not have to rely on an uncertain supply of “born leaders”, and anyway there will never be enough of them.’
‘I am surprised to hear you say that this foundation stone of enormous belief in people can be taught. I make a distinction between the knowledge that we are taught or learn on the one hand, and the knowledge we acquire. For example, we acquire our mother language.
What I think happens is that we catch a glimpse of this greatness or nobility of spirit first in one person, and it alters our view of all other people for we have sensed an underlying pattern and are programmed to look for it. Just for fun, see if you can see a picture in these shapes:
‘Don’t worry if you cannot do so – nine out of ten people can’t. Here is the answer.’ With that I handed to the young chief executive the solution (see p. 202). ‘The point is this. Whenever you now look at the above collection of shapes – try as you may to prevent it – you will always see the solution-picture. If you don’t believe me, try it out. And if you act towards people as if that solution picture is within them, they may well reciprocate by showing greatness. Isn’t that what you learnt from Steve Down?’
Treat People As If They Were What They
Ought To Be And You May Help Them To
Become What They Are Capable Of BeingEmerson
The young chief executive was silent for two or three minutes. ‘Doesn’t it stand leadership on its head?’ he asked.
‘If people are great, then they deserve to have great leaders. Up to now I have assumed that it was the leader that makes the people great.’
‘You are nearer to the mark. What you said reminds me of what the Roman historian Livy wrote at one point in his history: Rome being great deserved great leaders.’
‘So I have not discovered a new theory of leadership,’ he laughed.
‘If we jump a few centuries, we find Dr Samuel Johnson of dictionary fame commenting on what he called the plebian magnanimity of the English soldier. (The plebs were the common people of Rome.)’
‘I suppose he meant by that what you said earlier about facing danger calmly and proving always willing to make sacrifices to worthy ends.’
‘Yes, and the other military virtues too. Among them I would number cheerfulness and a sense of humour. Humour keeps things in proportion and lowers the tensions of the moment – it oils the wheels of daily living. But on occasion it can also express something we value in the human spirit. I like the saying: Humour is an affirmation of dignity, a declaration of a man’s superiority to all that befalls him.’
‘Did Johnson have anything to say about leadership?’
‘Indeed Johnson did. The British redcoats, he said, expect their officers to lead them into battle from the front. For their part, he continued, the officers are confident that if they do so, the men will follow…’
‘That’s a perfect expression of the implicit mutual “contract” we were talking about earlier,’ interjected the young chief executive.
‘Johnson said that this occurs not because British soldiers lack bravery or initiative, almost implying that they could conduct themselves perfectly well without officers. Yet they accept such leaders as I have outlined as “a tribute to their own loyalty and esprit de corps”. A tribute is a gift or service showing respect, gratitude or affection. Leadership as a tribute to those whom one respects and trusts – that reminds me of the great motto of Sandhurst: Serve to Lead.
‘Johnson added that in the case of other European nations (before the French Revolution changed things) the officers do not lead their men into the fight but follow behind to ensure that no one skulks off to the rear when the first shots are fired.
‘It’s worth adding,’ I continued, ‘that one who leads soldiers into battle from the front is far more likely to get killed than anyone in the rank and file. For it’s a natural instinct for soldiers to pick off the leader of the opposing forces, if they can identify them. They know that his death can cause panic, so that men break and run. Jesus quoted a proverb to that effect: Smite the shepherd and the sheep will scatter.’