3 ms·
One missing observation from this article is the existence of the sidekick gang that normally follows these types. Unlike their leader, then tend to be generall
by snide 3y ago
One missing observation from this article is the existence of the sidekick gang that normally follows these types. Unlike their leader, then tend to be generally good people, but tolerate their leader as a means to an end. We see this everywhere, and it helps destroy our business, politics and social lives.
What I've come to realize over the years is that good people are reluctant to take the job in power, but allow bad people to float into those positions without much thought. That's a simplification, but it takes a warped personality to be able to distance yourself from the social or civic responsibility of having that much control. Speaking a bit from experience, the times when I actually managed a team larger than a few dozens, I couldn't actually cope (internally, not outwardly mind you) without thinking about people's well-being every waking hour. Most leaders with more responsibility above me in work seem to be able to suppress those worries (or maybe hide it like I did). I've come to believe a little narcissism is somewhat required in those roles. You really need to believe in yourself above others. The good folks always seem to step down after they've achieved whatever manner of success they set out to achieve.
- suoduandao3 3y agoI think part of the issue is also that our culture lacks a belief in Nobless Oblige. We're told from a young age that good people don't aspire to have power over others, but of course, that doesn't affect the need for the position, just the kind of people who aim to fill them. I wonder whether this relates to Thiel's observation that a disproportionate number of founder-CEOs have autism and what this might say about the messages we're putting out there about that kind of leadership.
- ianai 3y agoIt was called trickle down economics and it failed.
- harimau777 3y agoFor what it's worth, Nobless Oblige is the idea that people with power (originally nobility but we could probably extend it to people like wealthy industrialists) have an obligation to behave with nobility; in this context to help those less fortunate. It's sort of the opposite of trickle down economics in that trickle down said that the wealthy shouldn't be expected to directly work for the good of society because the wealth that they attain will trickle down and contribute to the good of society on its own.
- suoduandao3 3y agoOne might say it was rebranded as trickle down economics. Given the 'nanny state' that exists in London where there still is a culture of nobless oblige there might be an argument for benign neglect from the well-off. Of course, the ideal is a balance between the two extremes.
- harimau777 3y agoIt seems to me that the issue might be that most companies don't consider doing right for their team members to be one of their objectives. Therefore, effort that a leader spends on doing right for their team is viewed as a liability.
- deepfriedchokes 3y ago>Unlike their leader, they tend to be generally good people, but tolerate their leader as a means to an end. That doesn’t sound like good people. A few bad apples…, as they say.