Eisenhower and Machiavelli Leadership Styles

I am currently finalizing my notes on an online course on Leadership. As part of the preparation, I have just read the book by Susan Eisenhower, "How Ike Led" - and re-read the Oxford Press version of "The Prince" about Nicolo Machiavelli.

Here's what I learned,

The strategic leadership style of Dwight Eisenhower is vastly different from those of today's leaders, especially those in the USA, Russia, Hungary, Poland, North Korea, China, Brazil, and Belarus – who are more of the style described by Machiavelli.

Few people have made decisions as momentous as Eisenhower, nor has one person made such a varied range of them. Eisenhower eventually became more strategic than an operational leader, who relied on a rigorous pursuit of the facts for decision-making.

He seemed to have a talent for envisioning a whole, especially in the context of the "long game." His ability to see causes and various consequences (what we would now call "risk management") explains his success as Allied Commander in World War II and U.S. President. After making a decision, he was willing to make himself accountable for it, recognizing that personal responsibility is the bedrock of sound principles, and allegedly, the bedrock of the Republican Party principles in the 1950s.

Ike's personal character traits of?humility,?intellectual curiosity,?honesty,?integrity,?inclusiveness, and?strategic vision?are evident throughout the book written by his granddaughter, Susan Eisenhower. His initial challenges of leading the non-cohesive European Allies and over 10 million soldiers to victory in Europe, his subsequent Leadership of NATO and Columbia University, and then his many presidential national security challenges, including the growth of European communism, the Soviet Union, the nuclear arms race, the Suez Crisis, and the Soviet crushing of Hungarian uprising, not to mention American domestic challenges such as McCarthyism and open bigotry and racism.

This approach of Eisenhower was very different from that described in "The Prince" by Machiavelli and many of today's political leaders.

Machiavelli (1469-1527) was perhaps the first great political philosopher of the Renaissance period. His famous treatise, The Prince, written in 1513 and published after his death in 1532, stands apart from all other political writings of the period. It probed the efficient problems a monarch faced in trying to stay in power.

The Prince analyses the usually violent means by which men seize, retain, and lose political power. Machiavelli added a dimension of incisive realism to one of his time's major philosophical and political issues, especially the relationship between public deeds and private morality. His book provides a remarkably uncompromising picture of the true nature of power, no matter in what era or by whom it is exercised.?

Thus, Machiavelli has become an enduring symbol of the world of realpolitik - governmental policy based on retaining power rather than pursuing ideals.?

Machiavelli's outstanding contribution to Leadership was to become the first to highlight and explore the darker side of Leadership and notions of practicality and ruthless power. He described a world of political cunning, intrigue, and brutality. More interesting is that even after over 550 years, his legacy lives on in today's world.

Still today, any form of manipulative organizational or political behaviour is frequently described as being Machiavellian.

Machiavelli's thinking still reverberates in the minds of many, and he might be said to be simply representing the reality of political life, both inside and outside organizations. In effect, Machiavelli gave credence to the belief that it was acceptable to do whatever it takes for a leader. He was the first champion of opportunism over morality.

The book's central theme is that princes should retain absolute control of their territories, and they should use any means of expediency to accomplish this end, including deceit.

He argued that a leader "should know how to enter into evil when necessity commands."

Machiavelli begins "The Prince" book by describing the two principal types of governments: monarchies and republics. He lists particular virtues that a successful prince needs to possess if they are to succeed. However, he also concludes that some of these 'virtues' will lead to a prince's destruction, whereas other 'vices' will allow the Prince to survive. He wrote:

"It is unnecessary for a prince to have all the virtues but necessary to appear to have them."

The renown of The Prince is precisely to have been the first and the best book to argue that politics has and should have its own rules and should not accept regulations of any kind or from any source where the object is not to win or prevail over others.

Indeed, the very virtues that we might commonly praise in people, Machiavelli argues, might lead to a prince's downfall. For example, we might typically believe that it would be best for a prince to enjoy a reputation for generosity. However, he argues that if this generosity is given in secret, then no one will know about it, and thus a prince may be thought of as selfish and greedy.

If, on the other hand, the Prince is very open and generous, he might ultimately lose his wealth with the result that he might then be forced to extort more money from his subjects and thus become a hated figure.

For this reason, Machiavelli concluded that it was perhaps best for a prince to cultivate and enjoy a reputation for being rather mean.?

Recognising and accepting that human nature is fickle meant that the practical Prince knew how to instill fear in his subjects so that they would not betray him. Machiavelli argued that a prince should be severe rather than merciful when punishing people for crimes. Demonstrating severity through awarding death sentences may affect only a few, but he argued that it would help deter crimes that ultimately impact many people. Ruthlessness, in Machiavelli's terms, meant the inability to demonstrate pity or compassion to others.

In dealing with enemies, he argued that the Prince needed to be fast and decisive.

One of his most famous quotes on Leadership is:

"It is best for a leader to be loved but if they cannot be loved they must be feared."

A prince, he argued, could easily avoid hatred by not confiscating the property of his subjects:

"People more quickly forget the death of their father than the loss of their inheritance."

Perhaps the most controversial section of The Prince is where Machiavelli explores the really dark side of Leadership and argues that the Prince should know how to be deceitful when it suits his purpose.

When the Prince needs to be deceitful, though, he must not appear that way. Indeed, he must always exhibit five virtues: mercy, honesty, humaneness, uprightness, and religiousness. It is this application of two-faced, double-dealing behaviour that Machiavelli has become synonymous with. It is all about the ability to tell a story that you do not believe in with real credibility. Integrity and ethical behaviour, it seems, have little to do with this world.

Indeed, Machiavelli exposes the darker side of Leadership, a side that stands in marked contrast to many of the works of today's human-centered leadership studies. Yet, in an authentic sense, his work seems more relevant today than ever, especially when discussing the nature of Leadership.

The recent corporate scandals in the United States and Europe have provided vivid examples and confirmations that unbridled and absolute power can corrupt on a massive and destructive scale. Those managers who operate in any large organization will know that Machiavelli's strategies and tactics are clearly followed by some colleagues, especially in political organizations.

References

How Ike LED, The Principles Behind Eisenhower's Biggest Decisions, Susan Eisenhower, MacMillan, 2020

The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli,?Peter E. Bondanella?(Translated by), Oxford World's Classics, 2008

Gurus on Leadership, Mark Thomas, Thoroughgood Publishing, 2006

?