Lincoln and other presidents

One grandiose-sounding statement that is justifiably true is that it is hard to compare the job of the POTUS to any other one. Yes, leadership styles can be applied, as is being done on this blog, but in terms of sheer pressure, forces pulling and pushing, and certainly politics, being the POTUS is probably the ultimate test of one's mettle. It seems, therefore, that it might be useful to look at the leadership styles of other Presidents and consider them as well.

One that springs to mind is JFK. With the Cuban Missle Crisis, we came the closest to nuclear holocaust as any other time in history. It's comparable to the disolution of the union, I guess, though it certainly wasn't a 5 year struggle.

Irving Janis' GroupThink book, which is terrific, talks about the difference in leadership style between the Bay of Pigs invasion, conceived under Eisenhower but implemented by Kennedy's administration, and the Cuban Missle Crisis. Both had essentially the same set of men involved. However, with the Bay of Pigs, Kennedy basically listened only to what the military and CIA said, believed what they said, made presumptions about the "enemy," and went ahead without critical thought and trying to poke holes in the proposal. The result was an unmitigated disaster.

In comparison, Kennedy convened an "Executive Committee" for the Cuban Missle Crisis that approached things very differently. He learned from the Bay of Pigs. He asked just a bunch of smart people - the smartest around, not necessarily the smartest in his immediate cabinet (and in fact it was the former envoy to the USSR that came up with the real solution, not RFK, not McGeorge Bundy, not Robert McNamara, etc). He also asked them to question information, to play devil's advocate (RFK has been criticized for his aggressive approach to this in particular, but considering we did not evaporate in a nuclear cloud, I don't have a problem with his vehemence), to avoid presumptions about the accuracy of information or about the other side.

So what does this mean in terms of IT? Well, there's the "surround yourself with smart people" point. JFK also was at only one or two of the major meetings, so the "let your people do their job" idea can be in there as well.

Thoughts?

Managing while walking about

One of the first principles Phillip's discusses in his book is the concept of managing while walking about or getting out into our organization to work with your staff. Do you feel this is vital or not. Can it become too time consuming? Where is it most appropriate?

Communication

Master the Art of Public Speaking - Lincoln was careful of his words once he became president. He was an excellent oratory and speech writer. He influenced people through conversation and story telling. Humor was a major tool in his communication style. He created messages that were honest succinct and sincere. This is clearly illustrated in the Gettysburg address. Are there key ways that you use humor in IT to get your message across? Do you spend a considerable amount of time developing your vision and goals for your IT organization and how do you communicate this to your staff and clients? Can you think of some best practices in communication methods for both your staff and your clients?

Leading

Lincoln lead by being led. He was a strong proponent of empowering his generals to make their own decisions. He gave them credit for their successes and took the blame for his generals' failures. He listened to his generals and staff and valued their opinions. He also made sure that his generals got the credit they deserved so they could take pride in their results. Finally, he only used his position of power when it was absolutely necessary. Can you give some examples of making sure credit for the success of IT projects was given to the teams involved. Have you had times that you used the power of your positon to get something done? Do you believe that a good manager has the best job in the world since as Casey Stengle would say "I get credit for watching other people hit home runs"? Do you have examples of you making sure the spotlight of success was on the team implementing the project and on the organization as a whole and not necessarily the CIO or the directors involved. Do you feel that this is a good principle?

Lincoln on Facebook

I stumbled upon this graphic (Lincoln on Facebook) in the newspaper: http://www.indyweek.com/pdf/020409/LincolnFacebook.jpg I thought it was an interesting spin on how we can view history, relate to the past and apply to modern day life.

If Facebook existed in the time of Lincoln's presidency, would he have used it in his political campaign or to communicate with his generals? Would you have been his "friends?" Would we be just as interested in what he looked like before he had a beard...just as much as the media is interested in the presidential pup in modern day?

What are your thoughts?

Master of paradox

Lincoln was:
Charismatic yet unassuming: Consistent yet flexible: Trusting and compassionate yet demanding and tough; When having a bad day be positive and supportive of your staff – keep your darker side to yourself (Lincoln wrote letters & did not send them). Do have examples from IT of these principles? Have you ever written a memo to staff but not sent it? Saved it for another day in case you still needed? Been trusting and compassionate while still demanding?

Character

Lincoln had the courage to handle unjust crtiticism and he felt that the truth was the best defense against slander. To that end he felt that major misrepresentation should be handled immediately while minor ones should be ignored. He also felt that the possibility of falling in the struggle should not deter one from the struggle. Have you had instances in IT of dealing with untruths and how did you handle them? Where their instances that you felt it was just best to let things go since the truth would eventully come out? Do you agree that one should take risk when there is a possibility of failure? Are their pros and cons in IT for handling these risks while still trying to ensure service to clients and also continued employment?

Persuasion vs. Coercion

Lincoln understood that persuasion was preferred to coercion when getting buy in on what he needed accomplished. He also understood human nature and that people responded to input in many different ways so he interacted with his generals in different ways depending upon their personalities. He believed that force should be used as a last resort and that people also needed to believe that what they are doing is their own idea. He also empowered his generals to act on their own and make their own decisions. Can you think of some IT examples of empowering your staff and managers depending upon their unique personalities? Can you also highlight sometimes when you had to resort to force to get things done.

Building strong alliances

Lincoln built strong alliances even with his adversaries. He made many of them members of his cabinet. He also forged alliances with his subordinates by empowering them to take action and tried to avoid the appearance of micro managing situations. Do you feel these principles will work in IT. Have you had both positive and negative experiences when aligning yourself with adversaries? Are there methods that you have used to be hands on without appearing to micro manage situations?