n
Bail Out—December 2007 |
||
|
As I watch the Fed, President Bush, and many of the Pundits on MSBNC, I am struck by how many back and how loud that backing is for a bail-out for this sub-prime mortgage mess. Clearly, firms and individuals that engaged in such speculation that directly contributed to the housing bubble and which, incidentally, made affordable housing a dream rather than a reality for many Americans should pay a price for their risk taking and speculation. With risk comes reward and, an occasional, stumble. Without stumbles and setbacks, risk no longer exists. So, we must let them fail. If you live by the blitz, you can die by the blitz. And that is exactly what should happen to Citigroup and Merrill. And as we know, in honorable leadership—our decisions must have consequences for us to truly learn. Class is now in session for many speculators and for many Wall Street investment houses. Dr. O
|
||
|
n
Strike Out—December 2007 |
||
|
We could write pages about the Mitchell report and its impact on the past, present, and future of baseball. Briefly, I would like to highlight one key point that Mitchell made to Jeremy Schapp of ESPN. Senator Mitchell said that the big losers in all of this were those that weren’t using performance-enhancing drugs; essentially, the 8945 baseball players who chose NOT to use steroids. Some lost their jobs, others were paid less—just trying to stay close to the cheaters who were artificially getting ahead. Kudos to Andy Pettitte for admitting his guilt. Of course, he shouldn’t make the Hall of Fame. Same should be said for those others mentioned in the report because, as we know, in honorable leadership—our decisions must have consequences for us to truly learn. Dr. O
|
||
|
n
TORTURE--2 April 2007 |
||
|
One of my best friends and a key contributor to my book, Sean Mikula, pointed me to a great article found on the front of this past weekend’s Wall Street Journal. The article is entitled The Conscience of the Colonel (March 31st 2007). This article is a great one and may point to one of the rare occasions that we bear witness to a true dilemma. Remember, a dilemma involves two decision points that are equally unfavorable and mutually exclusive. In addition, a time (or lack thereof) is usually embedded within a dilemma. In this article, Lt. Col Stuart was charged with prosecuting one of the key terrorist suspects down at Guantanamo Bay. Lt. Col Stuart found out as he was approaching the trial that this September 11th mastermind and minion had been tortured to gain a confession. Stuart approached his chain of command with the problem and then refused to carry on the prosecution. He did the right thing. But before I go on, let me comment on what I think torture is and what torture isn’t. And in this case, it is very, very close. Torture is what many Muslim radicals do every day and what the Sunnis and Shi’ia are doing to each other every day in Iraq: lopping heads off, putting drill bits into knee caps, and slicing off digits with a bolt cutter. That is torture. What the NYPD or the LAPD or CSI Miami does is not torture. Sleep deprivation. Yelling. Raising of voices. Good cop. Bad cop. That is not torture. Here, there was some gray—the prisoner put in sexually explicit poses and told that his mother would be brought to Gutmo to be ganged raped. What I like about Stuart and where he conforms to the tenets of my book is that he wants to win badly…..he wants the ultimate outcome of winning the war on terror. But he (like other high elevation leaders) are not willing to sacrifice processes to achieve outcomes. It is the classic P-O model. Are you willing to adhere to legitimate processes in order to achieve desired outcomes? If you are not and are willing to engage in illegitimate processes then we’ve slid toward the terrorists. It is painful and harder, but honorable leaders realize that legitimacy and credibility are so very damn important. And it is only possible to be viewed as legitimate and credible when you will adhere and demand legitimate processes to achieve desired outcomes. Honorable leaders always stay above the fray and, here, the way to do that is renounce torture and get the bad guys the right way—the American way—regardless of what other groups do or are doing. Always Stand that Ground! Dr. O
|
||
|
n
Can Honor Be Taught?--28 March 2007 |
||
|
I would like audience feedback. One guy thinks peace can be taught via video game. http://www.asiburak.com/ Check out his site. Great stuff. If violence and racism (like most attitudes and behaviors) are learned (not God-Given)....a newborn isn't born a racist, then honor and honorable leadership should also be a learned behavior. I'm ready for an honor video game--how about you? Always Stand Your Ground! Dr. O
|
||
|
n
Some Praise--28 March 2007 |
||
|
This note came from an honorable leader that I met at a conference---givin' me some love--thanks Tony! You need to attend an Evan Offstein presentation! Many speakers talk about leadership. Most don't do the subject justice. Evan has such a grasp of the subject and an ability to communicate the message. His insight will open your mind and make you hunger for more. I bought his book (Stand Your Ground) and finished it in 3 days. I couldn't put it down!! DON'T read his book or attend a presentation unless you are committed taking a hard looking at yourself and your organization. This is truly an eye opening experience. Tony Skrdlant District Sales Manager Mutual of Omaha 7200 W 132nd Street Suite 180 Overland Park, KS 66213 913-402-1191x234 anthony.skrdlant@mutualofomaha.com
|
||
|
n
The Sample Size Problem—28 March 2007 |
||
|
A couple of weeks back, an IVY League doctoral student called me at home on a Sunday evening. She was a journalism doctoral student who was working on a freelance article for the New York magazine or New York Times or something like that. One of her first questions was something like this—Why do the U.S. Armed Forces torture prisoners and why is it condoned by senior officers? I said, “Stop right there.” This discussion was bothersome on so many fronts, but let me highlight just two. First, she’s not being intellectually honest. As a doctoral student trained as a researcher and thinker, this is disconcerting. A true researcher is able to almost completely shelve their bias to get at the facts. She was intellectually dishonest by the very question that she asked me. She had an agenda to push. I asked her why and how she called me. She said that she got word of my book, Stand Your Ground, and thought that it was ironic since the perpetrators of the Abu Ghraib incident came from a military unit 15 miles from my house—just outside of Cumberland, Maryland. Again, I turned the tables on her and asked her—“Are you going to make inferences and generalizations off a sample size of 5?” What I challenged her on was the sample size problem. She was making inferences of torture and barbaric treatment based on the actions of a handful—somewhere between 5 and 20. Forget the fact that there have been 500K servicemen and women through Iraq and that 99.97% of the time our soldiers, marines, and sailors are acting with kindness, generosity, and compassion. That’s the story that needs to be told. And we need to be intellectually honest. So the next time you start to say to yourself…..all dogs bite, all prisoners on furlough attack, all older drivers are…..remember the sample size problem. Make more informed and honest inferences. Be a great leader! Be an honorable leader! Always Stand Your Ground! Evan
|
||
|
n
Note from a friend--2 FEB 2007 |
||
|
Please enjoy this note from Pat Toffler-this his his response to a recent Wall Street Journal OP-ED series on education--his contact info is below-- Always Stand Your Ground! Dr. O < As I read "Schools Act to Short-Circuit Spreaf 'Cyberbullying'", [WSJ, "Personal Journal", 23 Jan '07, p D1], I was reminded of a visit I made a few years ago to the Jamestown, New York School District. When touring one of the elementary schools (its cornerstone read 1954), I was struck by the axiom, chiseled in stone, transcending the main entrance: "Character is the Goal of Education." I remarked to my companion (the Deputy Superintendent of the School District) that, somewhere along the way, we abandoned the goal. She retorted, defensively: "Oh no we haven't, character is still our priority." I then asked, "Really, well then what are we doing to make-it-happen"? She then proceeded to explain all the reasons why it was almost impossible to do much. Rules, regulations, budget limitations, "student rights", lack of teacher/parental support, etc, etc, etc. These all conspired to relegate school activities to basic subject material, sports, and other extra-curriculars. So, real effort was expended on developing competency, character would have to fend for itself. The cyberbullying story suggests it is still so today. Nowhere in the article is there mention of the best (and only enduring way) to redress and arrest bullying -- of any kind. That is, we must raise children who believe such behavior is unethical and inconsistent with our fundamental values. If we can raise children with the competency to use advanced technology, we must raise children who have the character to use it wisely -- including the courage to support a victim, raging against a perpetrator. If we do not, no set of proscriptions, by themselves, will prevent the unconscionable abuse that competent people may wreak on others. We must develop both competence and character, or we may expect that the former, untamed by the latter, will constitute our greatest threat. br /> Respectfully, Patrick A. Toffler COL(Ret) US Army Center for Leadership and Ethics www.leadershipandethics.com
|
||
|
n
Let’s Honor President Ford—but let’s be honest— |
||
|
Ford is tied very tightly to the Watergate scandal. Of course, this honorable leader had no direct tie to the scandal itself. But he was instrumental in pardoning President Richard Nixon for his knowledge (and probably directed order) of the break-in of the Democratic National Committee Headquarters within the Watergate Hotel. Over the last several days, the media and pundits have said that Ford’s pardoning of Nixon was the right thing to do to “heal” the nation. I disagree. Nobody is above the law. And the right way that we achieve healing is by witnessing due process and seeing leaders held to the same standard as everybody else. Ask a cancer survivor if healing is a painless process. Ask a soldier or Marine who lost a limb at Walter Reed whether healing is painless. The answer is no. True healing requires pain and sacrifice. You can’t shortchange healing. Why did we try to do so here? Many say that Ford’s pardon of Nixon cost him his election. I say it costs us all a bit more. The cynicism and our distrust of leaders are magnified when we see different standards and violations of due process occur. Don’t get me wrong, President Ford was probably a good, noble, and honorable man. However, let’s not kid ourselves. The pardon of Nixon was a mistake and it was the easy way out. To this day, I think we’ve all paid for the pardon of Nixon. Always Stand Your Ground! Dr. O
|
||
|
n
Control versus Commitment? What do you choose? |
||
|
I have two little girls and there’s nothing more that I want to do then to put a John Ashcroft chip in their head. What would this chip do? It would allow me to track them, monitor them, and control their decision making. In short, I want to control them to make sure they stay away from drugs, alcohol, and, mostly, boys— That is the natural reaction—to control. With controls, comes costs. Costs of oversight, of contracts. Sarbanes-Oxley is a great example of legislation aimed at controlling the behavior of boards and executives. Without exception, controls limit or stunt a person’s or leader’s discretion. In reality, controls have severe limitations and they are grounded mostly in the discretion argument above. With controls, people no longer think for themselves. They respond only to controls, rules, and regulations. Not surprisingly, people never learn when controls are the predominant method to ensure honorable behavior. What is worse, when the controls disappear, leaders cannot function. There are no rules to guide their decisions. I know with my girls, I need something more. I need commitment. Not controls. It takes time and trust and you must be able to tolerate some mistakes, but commitment in the long run will always trump controls. Today, I gave a final in my ethics class at Frostburg State. Initially, on the first exam four months ago, I made controls and penalties very clear for violating our class honor code of not lying, cheating, or stealing. Over the course of five months, however, I relied less on controls and more on commitment. Today was the crowning achievement; I gave the final and then walked out of the room for 50 minutes. The effective use of commitment saved me 50 minutes of my life which were much better spent when compared to hovering over someone’s shoulder. This entry is not about how to build commitment. That is beyond the scope of this entry. What I do say, however, is that when the world and even our instinct says to use controls, in reality that is always the easy way out. Work at developing commitment in the long run rather than continual reliance on controls. Because as we know with Enron, GlobalCrossing, and Adelphia rules were made to be broken and controls have obvious limitations. I can find no substantive drawback when commitment is built and forged between two parties. Lastly, I’ve struggled over the last 10 days finding entry material. I am committed (no pun intended) to do one blog entry a week, but I’d love to have more. Send me what you got— Happy Holidays and Always Stand Your Ground! Dr. O
|
||
|
n
A Special Christmas Poem--29 November 2006 |
||
|
Every year, I get this poem. This year the message originated by a Navy guy that is stationed in Iraq. On the eve of the Army-Navy, I've decided to post-- Enjoy and Stand Your Ground! The embers glowed softly, and in their dim light, I gazed round the room and I cherished the sight. My wife was asleep, her head on my chest, My daughter beside me, angelic in rest. Outside the snow fell, a blanket of white, Transforming the yard to a winter delight. The sparkling lights in the tree I believe, Completed the magic that was Christmas Eve. My eyelids were heavy, my breathing was deep, Secure and surrounded by love I would sleep. In perfect contentment, or so it would seem, So I slumbered, perhaps I started to dream. The sound wasn't loud, and it wasn't too near, But I opened my eyes when it tickled my ear. Perhaps just a cough, I didn't quite know, Then the sure sound of footsteps outside in the snow. My soul gave a tremble, I struggled to hear, And I crept to the door just to see who was near. Standing out in the cold and the dark of the night, A lone figure stood, his face weary and tight. A soldier, I puzzled, some twenty years old, Perhaps a Marine, huddled here in the cold. Alone in the dark, he looked up and smiled, Standing watch over me, and my wife and my child. "What are you doing?" I asked without fear, "Come in this moment, it's freezing out here! Put down your pack, brush the snow from your sleeve, You should be at home on a cold Christmas Eve!" For barely a moment I saw his eyes shift, Away from the cold and the snow blown in drifts.. To the window that danced with a warm fire's light Then he sighed and he said "Its really all right, I'm out here by choice. I'm here every night." "It's my duty to stand at the front of the line, That separates you from the darkest of times. No one had to ask or beg or implore me, I'm proud to stand here like my fathers before me. My Gramps died at ' Pearl on a day in December," Then he sighed, "That's a Christmas 'Gram always remembers." My dad stood his watch in the jungles of ' Nam ', And now it is my turn and so, here I am. I've not seen my own son in more than a while, But my wife sends me pictures, he's sure got her smile. Then he bent and he carefully pulled from his bag, The red, white, and blue... an American flag. I can live through the cold and the being alone, Away from my family, my house and my home. I can stand at my post through the rain and the sleet, I can sleep in a foxhole with little to eat. I can carry the weight of killing another, Or lay down my life with my sister and brother.. Who stand at the front against any and all, To ensure for all time that this flag will not fall." "So go back inside," he said, "harbor no fright, Your family is waiting and I'll be all right." "But isn't there something I can do, at the least, "Give you money," I asked, "or prepare you a feast? It seems all too little for all that you've done, For being away from your wife and your son." Then his eye welled a tear that held no regret, "Just tell us you love us, and never forget. To fight for our rights back at home while we're gone, To stand your own watch, no matter how long. For when we come home, either standing or dead, To know you remember we fought and we bled. Is payment enough, and with that we will trust, That we mattered to you as you mattered to us."
|
||
|
|
Menu  |
|
Honorable Organizations in the Spirit of Stand Your Ground |
|
Military Job Placement Executive Coaching Corporate Testing Services Web Design Services Business Consulting Professional Associations
|
|
Links |
|
Statistics |
|
Total Hit
2949 Today Hit 22 |
©
2008 Honorable Leadership Blog by Evan Offstein
