Immature Leadership

Leadership has often become the concept of purported "accountability." However, accountability has oftentimes turned into "policing." Is that what your company is like? True leadership aims to increase everyone. When is the last time you have been led by true leadership? Policing is not meant to lead. Policing is meant to examine and prosecute your faults.

Therefore, coaching and policing are opposites. They will always clash; unless the coach is above the police! Why? Because the coach needs to coach the police too. Thus, if the leaders of your company are simply policeman, that company will eventually perish. The reason is, the policeman inside of you, will find fault with everything, until there is nothing left to criticize.

Since perfection is at a minimum in this world, the company will eat itself. Therefore, everyone in your company needs coaching. Is there a need for the police? Yes. But if put police in leadership positions, above coaches, they will simply criticize the coaches until the coaches resign, or get fired. Then management will turn on each other. Will the real coaches please rise up, or is your organization being led by immature leadership?

Age is not the remedy for immature leadership. Some people have never matured in character. If you have not been responsible for lifting others, that part of you will remain immature. Being responsible for profits is not the same as being responsible for growth. Management and coaching are two different things. I always say, "you can manage a pie until no pies left. Then you start managing pieces of pie."

So, eating the pie fast or slow is management. If only one pie remains, you will eat it slower than you would if you had a bunch of pies. This is not rocket-science. So, is your company led by managers with a police or coaching mentality? Coaching is different. Coaching must make sure everyone in the company knows how to make more pies.

Sometimes you run across an individual that is great at playing, coaching, and managing. Larry Bird of the Boston Celtics was that kind of person. He was a very good player, very good coach, and very good GM. However, a league like the NBA, doesn't allow General Managers to tell coaches how to coach very often. It is actually very rare because a GM is a management position, and coaching is a very different art. That is why the league has consistently grown for decades.

So, if you want your organization to grow like the NBA. Learn from the NBA. There are room for analytics, management, directors, etc. But make sure you have coaches, and make sure those other positions do not hinder coaches. The role of a GM is to make decisions based on budget. The role of an analyst is to give each position data so that a decision can be made. The role of a director is to lead managers into the direction of the company handed down by upper management.

Based on the roles stated above, it appears the entire organization is managing. It's like managing emotions. You have to keep them in check. Where are your coaches? Who is making sure everyone is learning how to make pies? If you are not very good at making pies yourself, but are gifted at management, you will only be managing bad pies. You will then direct marketing to market bad pies. That cannot be good for a consumer. There goes the company!