Category — Leaders
Depressed Leaders
“Great crisis leaders are not like the rest of us; nor are they like mentally healthy leaders,” writes Nassir Ghaemi in the Wall Street Journal (7/30/11). They are leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., Winston Churchill and Abraham Lincoln — all of whom had one thing in common. They all suffered from depression. Both Gandhi and King attempted suicide, and Lincoln was under a suicide watch at one point. Churchill admitted that he “avoided ledges and railway platforms, for fear of an impulsive jump.” The link between madness and genius apparently doesn’t apply “just to poets and artists but also to political leaders” and business leaders, too.
This is especially true in turbulent times, when “a different kind of leader — quirky, odd, even mentally ill — is more likely to see … opportunities that others cannot imagine.” Saner leaders do better in prosperous times, when it’s good enough to allow the “past to predict the future.” But depressed leaders have an edge when things aren’t so good because their illness heightens their sense of empathy and realism, “(though not necessarily in the same individual at the same time”). Lincoln, for instance “was not the stereotypical decisive executive, picking a course and sticking with it. He adapted to a changing reality and, in the end, prevailed.” Churchill “saw the Nazi menace long before others did.”
A heightened sense of empathy, meanwhile, “seems to prepare the mind for a long-term habit of appreciating others’ point of view.” Gandhi and King didn’t seek to defeat their opponents, but rather “to heal them of their false beliefs.” King believed that nonviolent resistance “was a psychological cure for racism, not just a political program. And the active ingredient was empathy.” This doesn’t fly when “society is happy,” but when “traditional approaches begin to fail … great crisis leaders see new opportunities. When the past no longer guides the future, they invent a new future … They are realistic enough to see painful truths, and when calamity occurs, they can lift up the rest of us. Their weakness is the secret of their strength.”
August 8, 2011 Comments
The Wednesday 10
In 1957, a young flack named Bill Safire was ordered to "round up some of New York’s most promising businessmen," reports Katherine Rosman in the Wall Street Journal (11/25/09). Bill was working for a P.R. firm called Tex McCrary at the time, and one of his bosses was feeling competitive pressure from a rival firm, Ruder Finn, which, rumor had it, was connected to the Young Presidents’ Organization. It was hoped that this new group of up-and-comers would help feed new business into the firm.
At first, they met over breakfast, then dinners, on Wednesdays. While the group had more than 20 members at various times, the idea was that it would be "small enough to maintain intimacy yet large enough to ensure that at least 10 members would show up" to each meeting. And so the group was called the Wednesday 10. They were mostly in their late 20s, Jewish, and many were sons of immigrants. Few enjoyed wealth, but "most went on to become luminaries in their fields."
It was, in short, a social network. Meetings began with personal updates, and "centered on career development." While only men were allowed, it drew its strength from its professional diversity. "It helped me to understand why other people do what they do — which is important in life and business," says Robert Menschel of Goldman Sachs. Fifty-two years later, they are still meeting, albeit less frequently, on Wednesdays. Bill and seven other members have now passed on, and it appears likely the group will die with its members. Oh, well. For the rest of us, there’s LinkedIn.
November 30, 2009 Comments
Dyslexicpreneurs
Hey, it worked for Richard Branson, David Neeleman and Charles R. Schwab — and it turns out that dyslexia works for about one-third of all entrepreneurs, according to a new study as reported by Brent Bowers in The New York Times (12/6/07). The study, by Julie Logan of the Cass Business School in London, “found that more than a third of the entrepreneurs she surveyed — 35 percent — identified themselves as dyslexic … The study was based on a survey of 139 business owners in a wide range of fields across the United States” and eclipsed the “20 percent of British entrepreneurs who said they were dyslexic in a poll she conducted in 2001.” Julie thinks the US/UK discrepancy can be explained by “earlier and more effective intervention by American schools to help dyslexic students deal with their learning problems. Approximately 10 percent of Americans are believed to have dyslexia, experts say.” But of course the question is, what is it about dyslexics and entrepreneurship? It seems that many of the techniques adopted by dyslexics to cope with their weaknesses in reading and writing translate well to entrepreneurism. For one thing, dyslexics tend to compensate by developing their verbal skills, which come in handy. For another, they become very good at sizing up other people and delegating to them. That’s because they grew up with a clear understanding of their weaknesses and knew it was critical to identify those that could help them get ahead. Perhaps most important, they’re used to dealing with obstacles and rejection, meaning they tend not to listen to those who say something can’t be done. “If you have a healthy dose of rejection in your life, you are going to have to figure out how to do it your way,” says Paul Orfala, a dyslexic and the founder of Kinko’s. “I think everybody should have dyslexia,” says Paul, who also has A.D.D. ~ Tim Manners, editor |
December 10, 2007 Comments
Jim Stengel
Tide detergent remains one of Procter & Gamble’s largest and fastest-growing brands because it “is doing well by doing good,” says P&G chief marketing officer Jim Stengel in a Fortune magazine interview with Geoffrey Colvin (9/17/07). Jim says Tide, even at age 61, is high-growth because its brand team has “surprised and delighted” with a “new compact size, which is great for the environment, great for our retailers, and great for the consumer.” He says it’s also because P&G has “done a lot of work to get more people to wash in cold water, which is terrific for energy savings.”
Jim says consumers are responding to Tide because “they want to trust something. They want to be understood, they want to be respected, they want to be listened to. They don’t want to be talked to … People really do care … about the values of a brand and the values of a company, ” he says, adding: “Businesses and brands that are breaking records are those that inspire trust and affection and loyalty by being authentic, by not being arrogant, and by being empathetic to those they serve.” He says the key for P&G was moving away from its traditional focus on “functional benefits” and concentrating instead on being “inspirational.”
For example, Pampers went “from being about dryness to being about helping Mom with her baby’s development.” Says Jim: “It all begins with this idea that we want to make life better … We don’t accept that there are any commodity categories,” he adds, citing the success of Charmin and Bounty in a “commodity” category like paper goods. Bottom line, says Jim is that, “marketing is at the center of the company … I wouldn’t be sitting here six years into this job if our equities weren’t stronger, our innovation pipeline wasn’t stronger, our organization wasn’t stronger. Those are the kinds of things a CMO needs to be accountable for and should be measured on.” ~ Tim Manners, editor
September 11, 2007 Comments
Assault on Advertising
|
In his latest book, Al Gore demonstrates a profound lack of understanding about the present state of television advertising in general and its true status relative to America’s democratic process in particular. A new Fast Company column by Tim Manners. (more) |
August 22, 2007 Comments
Dina Howell
|
Procter & Gamble shopper-marketing chief Dina Howell says the proof in retail’s potential is in the bottom line. An exclusive Q&A interview by Tim Manners. (more) |
May 1, 2007 Comments
Woz There, Done That
|
Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak says good technologists are the best marketers. An exclusive HUB Q&A. (more) |
March 12, 2007 Comments
Hoo-Wii!
|
Nintendo U.S. president and chief operating officer Reggie Fils-Aime on the hows and whys of Wii’s winning ways. An exclusive Q&A interview by Tim Manners. (more) |
March 5, 2007 Comments
Hillaryous Mononym
As if it weren’t enough to try to be America’s first female president (with apologies to Edith Wilson), Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton also wants to be the first presidential candidate since Ike to be elected on a first-name basis, notes Peter Funt in The New York Times (2/21/07). Referring to Mrs. Clinton as “Hillary” is nothing new, of course. But branding her with her first name for her presidential run is now underway with wrought-iron determination. According to Peter Funt (a son of Alan Funt), the name “Clinton” does “not appear anywhere in the long text on the site’s homepage.” Yes, it does appear “at the very bottom in the obligatory fine print: ‘Paid for by the Hillary Clinton for President Exploratory Committee”, but try fitting that on a bumpersticker. “A close inspection of the site reveals how determined its designers were to cleanse the campaign of the Clinton name. In the senator’s 1,937-word biography, the name ‘Clinton’ appears just once … ‘Hillary’ appears 38 times.” Peter Funt supposes this isn’t so much an attempt to distance herself from her husband, the former president. No, Peter’s best guess is that it is mainly “because she knows that she’s the only candidate whose name lends itself to Oprah-ization.” Neither McCain nor Edwards can expect much mileage out of their first names (although certainly Romney and Giuliani have similar potential — which Rudy clearly recognizes). Peter suspects the Hillary strategy may be a pre-emptive strike against Barack Obama, whose first name (and definitely his middle name) might not offer marketing advantages (his way-cool logo has taken ownership of the letter “O,” however). But the real play, suggests Peter, may be a diversionary one, shifting attention from “the question of whether America is ready for a female president” to “whether America is ready for a president who wishes to be known exclusively by her first name.” Then again, there’s also that guy named Bill … ~ Tim Manners, editor |
February 22, 2007 Comments
Innovation & Organic Growth
|
If A.G. Lafley can innovate, why can’t we? By Tim Manners. (more) |
February 14, 2007 Comments












