The Leaders We Need (my new book) (NGC)

[Scud]

Not sure if owners/mods are cool with this or not, but my new book, The Leaders We Need and What Makes Us Follow, Second Edition, is available for pre-order on Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/193262712X/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I thought some of you might be interested, and if you decide to buy a copy, I'd appreciate it if you could leave a review.

Warning, there is absolutely nothing in the book about motorcycles. And if this shameless plug for my own book is against the rules, feel free to delete this topic.

[Huzo]

Not sure if owners/mods are cool with this or not, but my new book, The Leaders We Need and What Makes Us Follow, Second Edition, is available for pre-order on Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/193262712X/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I thought some of you might be interested, and if you decide to buy a copy, I'd appreciate it if you could leave a review.

Warning, there is absolutely nothing in the book about motorcycles. And if this shameless plug for my own book is against the rules, feel free to delete this topic.

'Wouldn't lose too much sleep Scud.
There's more than one bloke on this forum has stood to gain from publicity..

[luthier]

There may be NGC but theories like this apply to Forums and the administrators in relationship with the members.
The ways the admin behaves and the corresponding members reactions are a miniature version of the way society behaves, or not.
Thus the study of  Fora as a micro unit or small group could be enlightening for those who seek to understand the macro aspects of society. The relative simplicity and the rules that are more easily enforced in a forum are a sure fire recipe for success that is not possible in the big wild world. Thus the complexity of political leadership is a very difficult topic, one which we must not discuss here as it is not allowed. Rightly so, and this is one of the great secrets of success when bringing a very large and disparate group together to discuss any topic.
To avoid obvious sources of disagreement is required and sensible for a smooth direction to be achieved. But there is more to it than just making the best rules. There has to be a core of loyal followers to support the leader and then everyone else is swept along with the flow.
But success is also measured in terms of longevity  as most leaders come and go while the best manage to hang in and make most of their membership happy.
This is the case with this forum as we have a fearless leader who is stable and sensible and caring and generous. With all those great qualities he also has a wonderful core of very loyal followers so this place thrives.
I haven't read your book Scud, but I know that Forum etiquette and behaviour has some bearing on the ways that humans behave in this regard  . Do you think there are any parallels with society on a larger scale?

[Rhodan]

How difficult is it to put the book into an electronic format?  Don't know about other families but we've gone in that direction for many of our book purchases.  I still really enjoy having paper books and turning pages but the storage size of electronic is hard to beat.

[oldbike54]

 After thinking about your question for a few minutes Tim , and reading the blurb , I'm inclined to allow this . Seems the book isn't political , more about business . This is one of those gray areas where we get to exercise some judgement , unless something changes I am OK with this .

 Luap and Mike , any input here ?

 Dusty

[Scud]

The book is not political. The first edition was published by Harvard Business School Press with Michael Maccoby as the sole author. I worked with Michael on the second edition (paperback). But Harvard has retained the e-book rights and I'm not sure when (or if) they will release the e-book.

As for leadership relationships in organizations, (which can easily apply to the relationships formed in an online forum setting) I look at them through the lens of leadership philosophy.

A good organizational leadership philosophy should have, at a minimum, these four elements:

1 - Purpose. The reason that the organization exists. The underlying need it fills, problem it solves, or opportunity it embraces. A purpose is different than a mission because a mission can be accomplished. A clear purpose provides an enduring drive for the organization. For example, the purpose of the US National Park Service is (roughly paraphrased) "To preserve natural and cultural resources for the enjoyment of future generations." This job is never "done" because we expect that there will alway be more future generations. I haven't seen a written purpose statement for this forum, but based on my experience here, the purpose seems to be "To facilitate connections and knowledge sharing among Moto Guzzi enthusiasts." - at least that's the need it fills for me.

2 - Practical Values. These are the values that are essential to accomplishing the purpose. For example, in public accounting (especially auditing), independence is a practical value. We would not trust an audit report that was done by an accountant who has a major investment in the business being audited. At US NPS, a practical value is community involvement, it's essential to preserving the parks and monuments. We see here, in this forum, some ground rules that when broken result in admonishments or even removal from the forum.

3 - Basis for Moral Reasoning. This can be deeply personal, or it can be very simple. For example, who does an organization see as it's stakeholders and beneficiaries of its actions? If it's just management and  owners of publicly traded shares, an organization makes different moral decisions than if society at large or the environment is included in its basis for moral reasoning.

4 - Definition of Results. This includes more than financial results and should provide some indication about how well the organization lives up to the above three items.

Once the "forum" for relationships is established by a philosophy, then we can look at how the relationships play out within it. And yes, I think a small group like this can give us insight into the phenomenon of human relationships. This forum has a culture, a way of doing things. It takes newbies a little while to learn the culture - and some people blatantly disregard it. What works in one culture doesn't always work in another, and some cultural "norms" are not transferrable. Silly example here, and I hope Chuck in Indiana doesn't mind... Here on Wild Guzzi, people put (NGC) for No Guzzi Content, and sometimes write "Guzzi Content" to refer to being, shall we say, "fiscally conservative." When Chuck uses those two expression over on V11LeMans it looks a little out of place, because those are not "norms" in that slightly different culture. That site also has a thread dedicated to pictures of Girls and Guzzis, which would go against the culture here. So bottom line, yeah, the "rules" can influence the way people behave. But more interestingly to me... the rules that one person embraces in one context can work against that person if they assume the same rules apply in other contexts. When I recently rode a motorcycle in Australia, I didn't insist on riding on the right side of the road... Yes, that's an obvious example, yet we all take our own cultural expectations into other cultures and sometimes are surprised by others' behavior or their reactions to our behavior.

[Orange Guzzi]

SCUD, does a good leader take into account the needs or wants of a minority at the expense of the majority?  If so, how does this affect the 4 Elements you listed?

Or is always a "all for one, one for all" to achieve a common goal?

[Scud]

Well, in my experience, the "all for one, one for all" concept sounds nice, but rarely works out in real life.

As for the serving the majority vs the minority, it gets a bit more complicated. This is where a clear purpose and basis for moral reasoning can be a great guide. Sometimes working towards the purpose benefits the minority, sometimes the majority - depends what the purpose is, and it also depends on the context for the decision.

Then the practical values can come into play. Leadership decisions can be difficult when two practical values cannot be satisfied at the same time. Choosing between right and wrong is usually not too hard, but choosing between competing "rights" or situations where competing "wrongs" need to be managed are more complicated.

As an example, consider US President Abraham Lincoln who wanted to preserve the Union, but also was against slavery. He allowed slavery in the "border states" to keep them from leaving the Union. He was criticized by the abolitionists for allowing the practice of slavery to continue, but he also prevented slavery from being expanded to the western territories and states at that time. Later, and only when it was advantageous to win the US Civil War, he issued the Emancipation Proclamation, freeing all slaves. I know I'm over-simplifying here, but essentially, Lincoln had to temporarily go against one value to serve what he believed to be a higher value, and then ultimately was able to serve both values.

Leadership often involves a systemic approach to problem solving that does not lend itself to binary, either/or, type of decisions. Instead, it's a matter of understanding context, weighing priorities, exercising foresight to contemplate the future effects of today's actions, vision to describe a desired future state, and knowing the values and attitudes of the people involved (self and others) to build strong relationships while working to create that future state.

[rocker59]

 Luap and Mike , any input here ?

 Dusty

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one"

;-)



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[oldbike54]

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one"

;-)



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

 
 
 You can lead a horse to water , but you can't make him read a book 

 Dusty

[yogidozer]

I use a 9' leader 6x for trout, usually 

[wheaties]

Must be selling well, it's out of stock. 

[Old Jock]

 
 
 You can lead a horse to water , but you can't make him read a book 

 Dusty

"You can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead"

[wheaties]

My copy arrived just now.  Looks like an interesting read!  Thank you!

Matt

[Luap McKeever]

My take?

This is all pretty deep stuff.  Can't we just discuss motorsickles instead? They're more simple.

[Scud]

Thanks Matt - I hope you enjoy it.

Luap - yeah, it's deep and complicated, just like real people. Fixing a broken motorcycle is much easier than fixing a broken social system. I enjoy the relative simplicity and predictability of mechanical stuff. But to tie them together... I think Robert Pirsig (author of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance) said something along the lines of: "The real machine you're working on is yourself."