subject: Leadership: Old Lessons, New Settings [print this page] I wrote recently about the Roman statesman, Cicero, highlighting his focus on principles, communication, courage and succession*. I've reflected further and identified five leadership lessons from the political world in which he lived (106-43 BC). The first resonates strongly with more recent events in the Iraq. Importantly, each has implications for business leadership today. So, if I interviewed your peers and staff, how would they rate you on each of the lessons? High, medium or low? What do you need to do to improve on each one?
Consider all the steps and scenarios. Like a good chess player, a leader needs to think many moves ahead. The conspirators, who killed Julius Caesar, had completely failed to think through what they needed to do once the would-be emperor was dead. As with the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, they thereby lost the initiative.
Think carefully, act swiftly. Take time to make the right decision. But then act with urgency to gain advantage and not let the enemy find out what youre doing. Both Caesar and later Napoleon were known for thinking deeply about strategy but famous for then moving their armies with lightning speed. A literal case of first-mover advantage.
Build self-belief in your people. Cicero did not believe in auguries (inspecting animal entrails to check political plans). Similarly, many medieval monarchs doubted the power of religious faith. However, they all knew the merits of such support in bolstering the courage of their colleagues and armies. And also, how to get the advice they wanted!
Position yourself for the future. Or, more fatalistically: comes the time, comes the man. In WWII, Churchill was the man England needed. Similarly, Cicero was the person to protect the Roman constitution mid first century BC. Both had prepared themselves for years before the need became fully evident.
Maintain your personal compass. This may involve arguing with your boss or those running the system. Cicero fought for the republican ideal when others were willing to elect a dictator. Similarly, Talleyrand tried to dissuade Napoleon from his crazed expansionism and ultimately went behind his back to protect France's long-term interests.
Some of the above is controversial - the last even treasonous. But, that's leadership. If it wasn't complex and difficult, no-one would need you. How would people rate you on these five pointers? What's your plan for addressing the gaps?
