There’s a paradox in open democracies.
They can seem shambolic or even weak when they exercise their greatest strength.
That strength is accountability and consequences for poor behavior or performance.
Autocracies can seem stable and strong simply because their leaders aren’t held to account.
For behavior or performance.
A key strength of democracy over autocracy is scrutiny of its leaders.
Of course political leaders have many tricks and tactics to manipulate opinion, so the game of scrutiny can be a tough and protracted one.
Accountability isn’t always achieved.
It’s not a one sided battle.
Most leaders aren’t subject to the public scrutiny that political leaders receive (thankfully!) but judgment of competence inside an organization is equally important.
Leaders should promote accountability in themselves, and their team. Not all succeed.
Incompetence is sometimes ignored, condoned or even promoted.
Have you ever thought why?
We all make mistakes.
What if we don’t realize we made them?
We are also all susceptible to manipulation or blindness to mistakes.
If politicians have tricks and tactics to manipulate opinion, so too do all successful leaders.
Do you?
Let’s not be naïve. For every effort made to uncover the cause of mistakes, there can be equal or greater effort to cover up or deflect the cause. Especially when the mistake reflects on someone’s reputation.
And we’re even more blind to mistakes we make ourselves.
Sometimes that blindness is self-inflicted. We can rationalize that someone we like didn’t make a mistake.
Blindness to your own weaknesses is normal but blindness to those under you is irresponsible.
There’s a maxim in politics that in securing the prize you seek of high position, you also expose your own inadequacies.
So it must be for any leader.
If a key strength of democracy is scrutiny of its leaders, it can be a key strength for any organization.
“…leaders have many tricks and tactics to manipulate opinion, so the game of scrutiny can be a tough and protracted one…”
Scrutiny of performance is a key responsibility.
Self reflection is a key skill.
Healthy skepticism is healthy.
Do you actively seek multiple opinions on leaders in your team ? Including those who work in their teams?
Are you even slightly skeptical of performance reports? Especially ad hoc or “success” stories?
Do you set targets and measures or allow them to be set for you?
Do you make promotion decisions quickly?
Have you ever promoted someone you don’t like? Based on performance not relationship?
Do you give feedback to more senior leaders about other leaders? Good and bad?
Is teaching people to observe and overcome manipulative practices part of your leadership training?
We all make mistakes…but do we see our own as clearly as we see those of politicians?
.
.
“I might be wrong, but at least I’ve thought about it…”