Legal training has been quite useful in developing critical thinking. Whether one attains it in mathematics, philosophy or law, an analytic grounding can add great value in defining and confronting complex problems, or laying out a path to implement a vision.
Many people become self-conscious when they communicate. Whether it's writing or speaking, they are consumed by anxiety. Self-consciousness is an impediment to what is required to serve an audience effectively. One's goal must be to achieve audience consciousness. To put oneself in their place, to recognize that the value of any communication arises from how it is received by them, not by what it means to the author. Rather than learning a multiplicity of rules for speaking, for example, I would suggest that a focus on serving one's audience will simplify and clarify everything.
President-elect John F. Kennedy said to Robert McNamara that there's no school for presidents, or, for that matter, for secretaries of defense.
Often, in a given project team or network, one sees leadership roles shifting among various members at various times. Attempts to fit these into traditional views of "leader" and "follower" don't quite work. It's more like Twitter: the "leader" has "followers" - but the "followers" are empowered to alter the relationship unilaterally, and the "leader" must continually earn the consent of the "followers. "
Wal-Mart, with its legendary focus on customer value in terms of price, is innovating in sustainability. Now, we're beginning to see the mirror image, a convergence, as the not-for-profit sector is beginning to serve more effectively by applying private sector accountability and efficiencies to social needs. This reflects a rising recognition that to serve others best requires more than good intentions; it mandates a focus on real-world results. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are among the most conspicuous advocates and representatives of this transformation.
William McKinley has surely been underrated - in no small part because he was succeeded by a memorable leader, Theodore Roosevelt.
Any gathering of people requires leadership to cohere, to achieve its potential contribution. What is not needed is a "boss" of yore, directing everyone else's efforts toward "the one best way. "
Effective leaders at a high level tend to be skilled actors. Franklin Roosevelt is said to have to quipped, on being introduced to Orson Welles, that they were the two greatest actors in America. The story may be apocryphal, but the message rings true.
Dwight Eisenhower has been underestimated, which may relate to his advanced age in office, his somewhat uneven communications skills, and his failure to present a forward-looking vision on the rising issue of civil rights.
Presidential leadership is best evaluated not on the basis of one's agreement with the policies, but on their effectiveness in using their powers to transform the nation and our understanding of ourselves.
There are people all around us whose lives are masterpieces of service. One thinks of parents working two or three jobs to serve their families and community. So, too, many in the military or in nursing or teaching. As the needs are endless, so are the possibilities of service. Now, more than ever, empowered by the Internet, more of us can serve in more ways than ever before in history.
Theodore Roosevelt is of singular interest, because he was, in many evident ways, a self-created figure. He transformed his life into performance art. He intended his life to be an example for others to learn from or even emulate.
It was a particular pleasure to examine President Ronald Reagan's leadership. I experienced it first-hand, as a member of his administration in several capacities as well as his 1984 reelection campaign staff. The most common misconception is that Reagan was a bystander to his own career.
I often encountered books by academics and others who had not actually done what they had written about. They tend to create artificial simplicity; their prose doesn't have the vigor of "lived words. " On the other hand, many practitioners lack the context or introspection to make their experiences and understandings transferable - and, in our time, many don't actually write the books they "author. " My ideal is to unify theory and practice.
Woodrow Wilson administration ended in tragedy, with his insistence on governing following his disabling stroke. I suspect President Wilson is often graded on a special curve, because many academic historians identify with him as one of their own.
When Americans decry our politicians, we must remember that ultimately, politicians reflect us. When we demand more than mediocrity - and the passing comforts it bestows - we will certainly attain it. One hopes and prays it doesn't take an historic crisis for us to demand and reward excellence in public service.
One wonders if Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon's administrations may come to be viewed, in the future, as having been underestimated in some respects. To be sure, each ended in failure. Nonetheless, Johnson's accomplishments in civil rights and immigration legislation, and Nixon's in respect to relations with China, may loom larger with the passage of time.
Ronald Reagan's career was so unusual, so unprecedented, that this would be very interesting to learn, to gain understanding of his way of looking at the world.
Ronald Reagan was notably able to avoid having personal considerations dissuade him from taking decisive actions. This may have arisen in part from his career in motion pictures; it may be related to his being a bit of a loner; it may have related to his focus on those people and principles he sought to serve. What is clear is that this capacity enhanced his effectiveness. It was also a surprise to many people.
Theodore Roosevelt is among the most captivating of presidents in our time, but his administration is often underestimated. Roosevelt's successes in domestic and international affairs are so wide-ranging as to appear obvious or inevitable in retrospect.