The cost of arrogance

If you live in Canada, you are aware that we just completed a federal election. Canadian politics in general including the election campaign provide vast amounts of leadership subject matter. The most illuminating is the reason for this election in the first place.

One man’s dream

The recent Canadian federal election was in reality, about one man’s dream. This man “an elegant and fine minded individual,” as described by a member of his party, believed that he was destined to be the leader of this great country. This election was about the perceived entitlement of Michael Ignatieff, the leader of the Liberal party of Canada who said "let us dare to dream but let us also dare to act," and history now shows us the he did both.

Perhaps it was his 34-year absence from this country, writing and teaching – indoctrinating – other fine young minds in prestigious colleges, which created this impression within that he should be our leader. Regardless of reason, the fact is that despite all evidence to the contrary, Ignatieff thought “he” could win and triggered an election. This decision caused decimation in the Liberal party popular vote and seat count in parliament, with numerous long term MPs losing their seats including Ignatieff himself.

Humility is foundational to effective leadership, and as perfectly demonstrated in Canadian politics, arrogance usually results in the incapability to face the brutal facts. We see the problem with the conceited, proud, egotistical leader far too often, and other than “don’t make them a leader,” I am not sure how to correct.

For the self-important, high and mighty individual – the cure, the fix - is failure. You only had to watch Michael Ignatieff walk up to the podium to announce his retirement from politics to return to teaching to realize that his pride level has experienced a major correction.

Final thought: While I am not happy with the $300 million Michael’s dream cost Canadian taxpayers – I am happy with the final outcome. This time it was worth the expense.

If you disagree with any of this – you might be a liberal.

The cost of arrogance

Poor execution is an excuse

I am weary of hearing the word execution. Not the killing kind, the "do what you are supposed to do" kind. Leaders who blame failure on the lack of execution are misguided and, to be frank, wrong!

Failure in execution is actually grounded in the roots of poor communication. If one understands with complete clarity what they are to execute, and it is entirely possible with the resources and time available, there is only one reason for failed execution; I will get to that [one reason] in a moment.

The following story overwhelmingly illustrates the need for clarity in communication:

In the world of retail, the term facing describes the process of bringing merchandise to the front of the shelf to present a neat and full look for the customer. The manager of a certain new employee asked him to go and face aisle #5. After a period of time this manager noticed the employee just standing in aisle #5 and discovered that the employee understood the instruction to mean that he was to stand with his face toward aisle #5.

This is a true story; despite being simple and silly, a lack of understanding by either party is the primary root of poor execution.

By either party? Good communication requires good listening. Some leaders bark out instructions without realizing certain roadblocks and hindrances that make it difficult and sometimes impossible for complete execution. Listening and understanding would allow for a collective approach to removing these barriers, but some leaders believe that they [problems] will somehow disappear if they ignore them. And while "nothing is impossible with God," Matthew 19:26, those who ignore real problems will have rely exclusively on his or her faith to have any success.

The reality is, that blaming the lack of execution for failure is only an attempt to hold others responsible for poor communication. With respect to capital punishment, imagine holding an inmate on death row responsible for a botched execution attempt. That would of course be ridiculous.

That one reason: if the plan is sound, doable and clearly understood, the only possible reason for failed execution is open defiance / insubordination. This is a much different problem and relatively easy to resolve.

Poor execution is an excuse