Work Matters

Some Bosses Live in Fool’s Paradise: The Mum Effect

Written by

supermoxie

in

As I wrote earlier in the week, my post over at HBR on 12 Things That Good Bosses Believe generated a lot of interest and 75 comments.  I am now going to dig into each of the 12 points in detail over there.  The first one is "I
have a flawed and incomplete understanding of what it feels like to
work for me.  Or as Julia Kirby retitled it, Some Bosses Live in Fool's Paradise.  I talk about a host of psychological and structural factors that lead to such delusion, including the "Mum Effect"

Bosses are insulated from reality. As Jeff Pfeffer and I
reported in Hard Facts, extensive research proves that people
routinely "shoot the messenger." Bearers of bad news, even when they
aren't responsible for it in any sense, tend to be blamed and to have
negative feelings directed toward them. The result is the "Mum Effect":
subordinates with good survival instincts soften bad news to make it
sound better, or avoid passing it along to their bosses at all.
Therefore, in a steep hierarchy it is a happier and happier story that
reaches the top ranks. Our most disturbing example came courtesy of
physics Nobel Laureate Richard Feynman after his
investigation of the 1986 explosion of the space shuttle Challenger.
He said he'd asked a group of engineers to estimate the probability
that the shuttle's main engine would fail, and their estimates ranged
from 1-in-200 to 1-in-300. But when he asked the head of NASA to make
the failure-rate estimate, the answer he got was 1-in-100,000. Feynman
pointed to this as an illustration of managerial isolation from reality,
a problem he believed to be rampant throughout NASA. 

I should add, however, that not all followers keep bad news away from their bosses to the same degree.  I wonder, what can a boss do to encourage people to deliver bad news?  Yes, not shooting the messenger is a start. But is seems to me that their must be a lot more. 

P.S. Also, I got into argument over at HBR with commentor who took me to task for using the terms superior and subordinate.  He suggested team member because I was emphasizing power differences so much.  My response was that I am not talking about the world as we might like it to be, I am talking about the world as it is, and every organization has a system of rank and hierarchy, and the resulting power differences have hue effects on what people think, feel, and do.  Perhaps I was too tough, or perhaps I am a cynic, but while I do believe that leaders that de-emphasize spower differences are more effective than leaders who emphasize and expand them at every turn, I also believe that power differences are a fact of organizational life, and denying them sets people up for failure.

Comments

64 responses to “Some Bosses Live in Fool’s Paradise: The Mum Effect”

  1. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    Over the years since co-writing Driving Fear Out of the Workplace (last ed., 1998), I’ve stayed very interested in what it is that causes the mum effect. Increasingly, I’ve come back to the notion, started by Chris Argyris, that defensiveness creates a great deal of negative organizational culture. Is there a way for leaders to become less defensive? If so, then we can find out a lot more about the “hidden workplace” of feelings and perceptions that are really out there, and we can begin to ask ourselves essential questions about the personal behaviors that we exhibit, consciously or inadvertently, to keep the mum effect in place. This is, I believe, one of those things where there’s a culture in place that we trigger, and the culture in turn causes us keep triggering it. The only way to break out is to really understand how the cultural norms around silence work, know enough about ourselves to interrupt the process, and then, in addition talk about these dynamics openly, inviting awareness and collaboration in creating a different kind of workplace relationship. This is a vulnerable and human process, for sure, one where we stumble, and in the stumbling learn something about culture and, more importantly, something about ourselves.

    Reply
  2. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    Over the years since co-writing Driving Fear Out of the Workplace (last ed., 1998), I’ve stayed very interested in what it is that causes the mum effect. Increasingly, I’ve come back to the notion, started by Chris Argyris, that defensiveness creates a great deal of negative organizational culture. Is there a way for leaders to become less defensive? If so, then we can find out a lot more about the “hidden workplace” of feelings and perceptions that are really out there, and we can begin to ask ourselves essential questions about the personal behaviors that we exhibit, consciously or inadvertently, to keep the mum effect in place. This is, I believe, one of those things where there’s a culture in place that we trigger, and the culture in turn causes us keep triggering it. The only way to break out is to really understand how the cultural norms around silence work, know enough about ourselves to interrupt the process, and then, in addition talk about these dynamics openly, inviting awareness and collaboration in creating a different kind of workplace relationship. This is a vulnerable and human process, for sure, one where we stumble, and in the stumbling learn something about culture and, more importantly, something about ourselves.

    Reply
  3. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    Over the years since co-writing Driving Fear Out of the Workplace (last ed., 1998), I’ve stayed very interested in what it is that causes the mum effect. Increasingly, I’ve come back to the notion, started by Chris Argyris, that defensiveness creates a great deal of negative organizational culture. Is there a way for leaders to become less defensive? If so, then we can find out a lot more about the “hidden workplace” of feelings and perceptions that are really out there, and we can begin to ask ourselves essential questions about the personal behaviors that we exhibit, consciously or inadvertently, to keep the mum effect in place. This is, I believe, one of those things where there’s a culture in place that we trigger, and the culture in turn causes us keep triggering it. The only way to break out is to really understand how the cultural norms around silence work, know enough about ourselves to interrupt the process, and then, in addition talk about these dynamics openly, inviting awareness and collaboration in creating a different kind of workplace relationship. This is a vulnerable and human process, for sure, one where we stumble, and in the stumbling learn something about culture and, more importantly, something about ourselves.

    Reply
  4. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    Over the years since co-writing Driving Fear Out of the Workplace (last ed., 1998), I’ve stayed very interested in what it is that causes the mum effect. Increasingly, I’ve come back to the notion, started by Chris Argyris, that defensiveness creates a great deal of negative organizational culture. Is there a way for leaders to become less defensive? If so, then we can find out a lot more about the “hidden workplace” of feelings and perceptions that are really out there, and we can begin to ask ourselves essential questions about the personal behaviors that we exhibit, consciously or inadvertently, to keep the mum effect in place. This is, I believe, one of those things where there’s a culture in place that we trigger, and the culture in turn causes us keep triggering it. The only way to break out is to really understand how the cultural norms around silence work, know enough about ourselves to interrupt the process, and then, in addition talk about these dynamics openly, inviting awareness and collaboration in creating a different kind of workplace relationship. This is a vulnerable and human process, for sure, one where we stumble, and in the stumbling learn something about culture and, more importantly, something about ourselves.

    Reply
  5. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    Over the years since co-writing Driving Fear Out of the Workplace (last ed., 1998), I’ve stayed very interested in what it is that causes the mum effect. Increasingly, I’ve come back to the notion, started by Chris Argyris, that defensiveness creates a great deal of negative organizational culture. Is there a way for leaders to become less defensive? If so, then we can find out a lot more about the “hidden workplace” of feelings and perceptions that are really out there, and we can begin to ask ourselves essential questions about the personal behaviors that we exhibit, consciously or inadvertently, to keep the mum effect in place. This is, I believe, one of those things where there’s a culture in place that we trigger, and the culture in turn causes us keep triggering it. The only way to break out is to really understand how the cultural norms around silence work, know enough about ourselves to interrupt the process, and then, in addition talk about these dynamics openly, inviting awareness and collaboration in creating a different kind of workplace relationship. This is a vulnerable and human process, for sure, one where we stumble, and in the stumbling learn something about culture and, more importantly, something about ourselves.

    Reply
  6. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    Over the years since co-writing Driving Fear Out of the Workplace (last ed., 1998), I’ve stayed very interested in what it is that causes the mum effect. Increasingly, I’ve come back to the notion, started by Chris Argyris, that defensiveness creates a great deal of negative organizational culture. Is there a way for leaders to become less defensive? If so, then we can find out a lot more about the “hidden workplace” of feelings and perceptions that are really out there, and we can begin to ask ourselves essential questions about the personal behaviors that we exhibit, consciously or inadvertently, to keep the mum effect in place. This is, I believe, one of those things where there’s a culture in place that we trigger, and the culture in turn causes us keep triggering it. The only way to break out is to really understand how the cultural norms around silence work, know enough about ourselves to interrupt the process, and then, in addition talk about these dynamics openly, inviting awareness and collaboration in creating a different kind of workplace relationship. This is a vulnerable and human process, for sure, one where we stumble, and in the stumbling learn something about culture and, more importantly, something about ourselves.

    Reply
  7. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    Over the years since co-writing Driving Fear Out of the Workplace (last ed., 1998), I’ve stayed very interested in what it is that causes the mum effect. Increasingly, I’ve come back to the notion, started by Chris Argyris, that defensiveness creates a great deal of negative organizational culture. Is there a way for leaders to become less defensive? If so, then we can find out a lot more about the “hidden workplace” of feelings and perceptions that are really out there, and we can begin to ask ourselves essential questions about the personal behaviors that we exhibit, consciously or inadvertently, to keep the mum effect in place. This is, I believe, one of those things where there’s a culture in place that we trigger, and the culture in turn causes us keep triggering it. The only way to break out is to really understand how the cultural norms around silence work, know enough about ourselves to interrupt the process, and then, in addition talk about these dynamics openly, inviting awareness and collaboration in creating a different kind of workplace relationship. This is a vulnerable and human process, for sure, one where we stumble, and in the stumbling learn something about culture and, more importantly, something about ourselves.

    Reply
  8. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    Over the years since co-writing Driving Fear Out of the Workplace (last ed., 1998), I’ve stayed very interested in what it is that causes the mum effect. Increasingly, I’ve come back to the notion, started by Chris Argyris, that defensiveness creates a great deal of negative organizational culture. Is there a way for leaders to become less defensive? If so, then we can find out a lot more about the “hidden workplace” of feelings and perceptions that are really out there, and we can begin to ask ourselves essential questions about the personal behaviors that we exhibit, consciously or inadvertently, to keep the mum effect in place. This is, I believe, one of those things where there’s a culture in place that we trigger, and the culture in turn causes us keep triggering it. The only way to break out is to really understand how the cultural norms around silence work, know enough about ourselves to interrupt the process, and then, in addition talk about these dynamics openly, inviting awareness and collaboration in creating a different kind of workplace relationship. This is a vulnerable and human process, for sure, one where we stumble, and in the stumbling learn something about culture and, more importantly, something about ourselves.

    Reply
  9. Saurabh Gahrotra Avatar
    Saurabh Gahrotra

    Hi Bob, Loved your post up on HBR and looking forward to reading more on this here.
    Dan- I could not agree more with you on this. A supportive and non threatning organizational culture would go a long way in helping an organization get rid of this mum effect and defensiveness. However, every individual is different and the bars of pushing the envelope and encouraging defensiveness may greatly vary. So may be some serious thought needs to go into identifying the correct triggers.

    Reply
  10. Saurabh Gahrotra Avatar
    Saurabh Gahrotra

    Hi Bob, Loved your post up on HBR and looking forward to reading more on this here.
    Dan- I could not agree more with you on this. A supportive and non threatning organizational culture would go a long way in helping an organization get rid of this mum effect and defensiveness. However, every individual is different and the bars of pushing the envelope and encouraging defensiveness may greatly vary. So may be some serious thought needs to go into identifying the correct triggers.

    Reply
  11. Saurabh Gahrotra Avatar
    Saurabh Gahrotra

    Hi Bob, Loved your post up on HBR and looking forward to reading more on this here.
    Dan- I could not agree more with you on this. A supportive and non threatning organizational culture would go a long way in helping an organization get rid of this mum effect and defensiveness. However, every individual is different and the bars of pushing the envelope and encouraging defensiveness may greatly vary. So may be some serious thought needs to go into identifying the correct triggers.

    Reply
  12. Saurabh Gahrotra Avatar
    Saurabh Gahrotra

    Hi Bob, Loved your post up on HBR and looking forward to reading more on this here.
    Dan- I could not agree more with you on this. A supportive and non threatning organizational culture would go a long way in helping an organization get rid of this mum effect and defensiveness. However, every individual is different and the bars of pushing the envelope and encouraging defensiveness may greatly vary. So may be some serious thought needs to go into identifying the correct triggers.

    Reply
  13. Saurabh Gahrotra Avatar
    Saurabh Gahrotra

    Hi Bob, Loved your post up on HBR and looking forward to reading more on this here.
    Dan- I could not agree more with you on this. A supportive and non threatning organizational culture would go a long way in helping an organization get rid of this mum effect and defensiveness. However, every individual is different and the bars of pushing the envelope and encouraging defensiveness may greatly vary. So may be some serious thought needs to go into identifying the correct triggers.

    Reply
  14. Saurabh Gahrotra Avatar
    Saurabh Gahrotra

    Hi Bob, Loved your post up on HBR and looking forward to reading more on this here.
    Dan- I could not agree more with you on this. A supportive and non threatning organizational culture would go a long way in helping an organization get rid of this mum effect and defensiveness. However, every individual is different and the bars of pushing the envelope and encouraging defensiveness may greatly vary. So may be some serious thought needs to go into identifying the correct triggers.

    Reply
  15. Saurabh Gahrotra Avatar
    Saurabh Gahrotra

    Hi Bob, Loved your post up on HBR and looking forward to reading more on this here.
    Dan- I could not agree more with you on this. A supportive and non threatning organizational culture would go a long way in helping an organization get rid of this mum effect and defensiveness. However, every individual is different and the bars of pushing the envelope and encouraging defensiveness may greatly vary. So may be some serious thought needs to go into identifying the correct triggers.

    Reply
  16. Saurabh Gahrotra Avatar
    Saurabh Gahrotra

    Hi Bob, Loved your post up on HBR and looking forward to reading more on this here.
    Dan- I could not agree more with you on this. A supportive and non threatning organizational culture would go a long way in helping an organization get rid of this mum effect and defensiveness. However, every individual is different and the bars of pushing the envelope and encouraging defensiveness may greatly vary. So may be some serious thought needs to go into identifying the correct triggers.

    Reply
  17. working girl Avatar
    working girl

    I think it largely has to do with the boss themselves and the overall company culture: http://ls-workgirl.blogspot.com/2010/06/watch-eyebrows.html. Of course, some people tend to be more determined to tell the truth as they see it than others, but with an unreceptive corporate climate they tend not to last long.

    Reply
  18. working girl Avatar
    working girl

    I think it largely has to do with the boss themselves and the overall company culture: http://ls-workgirl.blogspot.com/2010/06/watch-eyebrows.html. Of course, some people tend to be more determined to tell the truth as they see it than others, but with an unreceptive corporate climate they tend not to last long.

    Reply
  19. working girl Avatar
    working girl

    I think it largely has to do with the boss themselves and the overall company culture: http://ls-workgirl.blogspot.com/2010/06/watch-eyebrows.html. Of course, some people tend to be more determined to tell the truth as they see it than others, but with an unreceptive corporate climate they tend not to last long.

    Reply
  20. working girl Avatar
    working girl

    I think it largely has to do with the boss themselves and the overall company culture: http://ls-workgirl.blogspot.com/2010/06/watch-eyebrows.html. Of course, some people tend to be more determined to tell the truth as they see it than others, but with an unreceptive corporate climate they tend not to last long.

    Reply
  21. working girl Avatar
    working girl

    I think it largely has to do with the boss themselves and the overall company culture: http://ls-workgirl.blogspot.com/2010/06/watch-eyebrows.html. Of course, some people tend to be more determined to tell the truth as they see it than others, but with an unreceptive corporate climate they tend not to last long.

    Reply
  22. working girl Avatar
    working girl

    I think it largely has to do with the boss themselves and the overall company culture: http://ls-workgirl.blogspot.com/2010/06/watch-eyebrows.html. Of course, some people tend to be more determined to tell the truth as they see it than others, but with an unreceptive corporate climate they tend not to last long.

    Reply
  23. working girl Avatar
    working girl

    I think it largely has to do with the boss themselves and the overall company culture: http://ls-workgirl.blogspot.com/2010/06/watch-eyebrows.html. Of course, some people tend to be more determined to tell the truth as they see it than others, but with an unreceptive corporate climate they tend not to last long.

    Reply
  24. working girl Avatar
    working girl

    I think it largely has to do with the boss themselves and the overall company culture: http://ls-workgirl.blogspot.com/2010/06/watch-eyebrows.html. Of course, some people tend to be more determined to tell the truth as they see it than others, but with an unreceptive corporate climate they tend not to last long.

    Reply
  25. Randy Bosch Avatar
    Randy Bosch

    Bob, Excellent points! Thank you.
    “…not all followers keep bad news away from their bosses to the same degree” infers a broad range of responses to a pandemic. One that is particularly damaging is followers keeping bad news away from their bosses in order to undermine, subvert, destroy them or their goals – even when the goals are superbly good!

    Reply
  26. Randy Bosch Avatar
    Randy Bosch

    Bob, Excellent points! Thank you.
    “…not all followers keep bad news away from their bosses to the same degree” infers a broad range of responses to a pandemic. One that is particularly damaging is followers keeping bad news away from their bosses in order to undermine, subvert, destroy them or their goals – even when the goals are superbly good!

    Reply
  27. Randy Bosch Avatar
    Randy Bosch

    Bob, Excellent points! Thank you.
    “…not all followers keep bad news away from their bosses to the same degree” infers a broad range of responses to a pandemic. One that is particularly damaging is followers keeping bad news away from their bosses in order to undermine, subvert, destroy them or their goals – even when the goals are superbly good!

    Reply
  28. Randy Bosch Avatar
    Randy Bosch

    Bob, Excellent points! Thank you.
    “…not all followers keep bad news away from their bosses to the same degree” infers a broad range of responses to a pandemic. One that is particularly damaging is followers keeping bad news away from their bosses in order to undermine, subvert, destroy them or their goals – even when the goals are superbly good!

    Reply
  29. Randy Bosch Avatar
    Randy Bosch

    Bob, Excellent points! Thank you.
    “…not all followers keep bad news away from their bosses to the same degree” infers a broad range of responses to a pandemic. One that is particularly damaging is followers keeping bad news away from their bosses in order to undermine, subvert, destroy them or their goals – even when the goals are superbly good!

    Reply
  30. Randy Bosch Avatar
    Randy Bosch

    Bob, Excellent points! Thank you.
    “…not all followers keep bad news away from their bosses to the same degree” infers a broad range of responses to a pandemic. One that is particularly damaging is followers keeping bad news away from their bosses in order to undermine, subvert, destroy them or their goals – even when the goals are superbly good!

    Reply
  31. Randy Bosch Avatar
    Randy Bosch

    Bob, Excellent points! Thank you.
    “…not all followers keep bad news away from their bosses to the same degree” infers a broad range of responses to a pandemic. One that is particularly damaging is followers keeping bad news away from their bosses in order to undermine, subvert, destroy them or their goals – even when the goals are superbly good!

    Reply
  32. Randy Bosch Avatar
    Randy Bosch

    Bob, Excellent points! Thank you.
    “…not all followers keep bad news away from their bosses to the same degree” infers a broad range of responses to a pandemic. One that is particularly damaging is followers keeping bad news away from their bosses in order to undermine, subvert, destroy them or their goals – even when the goals are superbly good!

    Reply
  33. Daniel Christadoss Avatar
    Daniel Christadoss

    Many years ago I worked on a massive fertilizer project in India. Most of us worked day and night to keep the project to schedule. However in projects of this size there would be inevitable delays, problems and irritants. The weekly progress meetings were held in a conference hall with a huge window facing the project. The meetings were attended by representatives of the owners, construction managers and the contractors. We were delayed in the erection of fertilizer bunkers because the purchasing agent of my company shipped only the bolts and not the nuts to secure the bunkers. The construction manager suggested that we hang the bunker walls on one side to give a completed look from the conference hall. The top boss was told that bunkers were in an advanced stage of completion and almost on schedule. Every one was happy and we had another week to complete.
    The project was ultimately completed on time and was one of the more successful projects in that area in the late 70’s.
    I have seen both sides. Excellent projects killed by bad reporting.
    Project disasters because of bosses being completely ignorant of massive problems due to wrong reporting. That is why projects work not because of the boss but because of the team he can pick and motivate.

    Reply
  34. Daniel Christadoss Avatar
    Daniel Christadoss

    Many years ago I worked on a massive fertilizer project in India. Most of us worked day and night to keep the project to schedule. However in projects of this size there would be inevitable delays, problems and irritants. The weekly progress meetings were held in a conference hall with a huge window facing the project. The meetings were attended by representatives of the owners, construction managers and the contractors. We were delayed in the erection of fertilizer bunkers because the purchasing agent of my company shipped only the bolts and not the nuts to secure the bunkers. The construction manager suggested that we hang the bunker walls on one side to give a completed look from the conference hall. The top boss was told that bunkers were in an advanced stage of completion and almost on schedule. Every one was happy and we had another week to complete.
    The project was ultimately completed on time and was one of the more successful projects in that area in the late 70’s.
    I have seen both sides. Excellent projects killed by bad reporting.
    Project disasters because of bosses being completely ignorant of massive problems due to wrong reporting. That is why projects work not because of the boss but because of the team he can pick and motivate.

    Reply
  35. Daniel Christadoss Avatar
    Daniel Christadoss

    Many years ago I worked on a massive fertilizer project in India. Most of us worked day and night to keep the project to schedule. However in projects of this size there would be inevitable delays, problems and irritants. The weekly progress meetings were held in a conference hall with a huge window facing the project. The meetings were attended by representatives of the owners, construction managers and the contractors. We were delayed in the erection of fertilizer bunkers because the purchasing agent of my company shipped only the bolts and not the nuts to secure the bunkers. The construction manager suggested that we hang the bunker walls on one side to give a completed look from the conference hall. The top boss was told that bunkers were in an advanced stage of completion and almost on schedule. Every one was happy and we had another week to complete.
    The project was ultimately completed on time and was one of the more successful projects in that area in the late 70’s.
    I have seen both sides. Excellent projects killed by bad reporting.
    Project disasters because of bosses being completely ignorant of massive problems due to wrong reporting. That is why projects work not because of the boss but because of the team he can pick and motivate.

    Reply
  36. Daniel Christadoss Avatar
    Daniel Christadoss

    Many years ago I worked on a massive fertilizer project in India. Most of us worked day and night to keep the project to schedule. However in projects of this size there would be inevitable delays, problems and irritants. The weekly progress meetings were held in a conference hall with a huge window facing the project. The meetings were attended by representatives of the owners, construction managers and the contractors. We were delayed in the erection of fertilizer bunkers because the purchasing agent of my company shipped only the bolts and not the nuts to secure the bunkers. The construction manager suggested that we hang the bunker walls on one side to give a completed look from the conference hall. The top boss was told that bunkers were in an advanced stage of completion and almost on schedule. Every one was happy and we had another week to complete.
    The project was ultimately completed on time and was one of the more successful projects in that area in the late 70’s.
    I have seen both sides. Excellent projects killed by bad reporting.
    Project disasters because of bosses being completely ignorant of massive problems due to wrong reporting. That is why projects work not because of the boss but because of the team he can pick and motivate.

    Reply
  37. Daniel Christadoss Avatar
    Daniel Christadoss

    Many years ago I worked on a massive fertilizer project in India. Most of us worked day and night to keep the project to schedule. However in projects of this size there would be inevitable delays, problems and irritants. The weekly progress meetings were held in a conference hall with a huge window facing the project. The meetings were attended by representatives of the owners, construction managers and the contractors. We were delayed in the erection of fertilizer bunkers because the purchasing agent of my company shipped only the bolts and not the nuts to secure the bunkers. The construction manager suggested that we hang the bunker walls on one side to give a completed look from the conference hall. The top boss was told that bunkers were in an advanced stage of completion and almost on schedule. Every one was happy and we had another week to complete.
    The project was ultimately completed on time and was one of the more successful projects in that area in the late 70’s.
    I have seen both sides. Excellent projects killed by bad reporting.
    Project disasters because of bosses being completely ignorant of massive problems due to wrong reporting. That is why projects work not because of the boss but because of the team he can pick and motivate.

    Reply
  38. Daniel Christadoss Avatar
    Daniel Christadoss

    Many years ago I worked on a massive fertilizer project in India. Most of us worked day and night to keep the project to schedule. However in projects of this size there would be inevitable delays, problems and irritants. The weekly progress meetings were held in a conference hall with a huge window facing the project. The meetings were attended by representatives of the owners, construction managers and the contractors. We were delayed in the erection of fertilizer bunkers because the purchasing agent of my company shipped only the bolts and not the nuts to secure the bunkers. The construction manager suggested that we hang the bunker walls on one side to give a completed look from the conference hall. The top boss was told that bunkers were in an advanced stage of completion and almost on schedule. Every one was happy and we had another week to complete.
    The project was ultimately completed on time and was one of the more successful projects in that area in the late 70’s.
    I have seen both sides. Excellent projects killed by bad reporting.
    Project disasters because of bosses being completely ignorant of massive problems due to wrong reporting. That is why projects work not because of the boss but because of the team he can pick and motivate.

    Reply
  39. Daniel Christadoss Avatar
    Daniel Christadoss

    Many years ago I worked on a massive fertilizer project in India. Most of us worked day and night to keep the project to schedule. However in projects of this size there would be inevitable delays, problems and irritants. The weekly progress meetings were held in a conference hall with a huge window facing the project. The meetings were attended by representatives of the owners, construction managers and the contractors. We were delayed in the erection of fertilizer bunkers because the purchasing agent of my company shipped only the bolts and not the nuts to secure the bunkers. The construction manager suggested that we hang the bunker walls on one side to give a completed look from the conference hall. The top boss was told that bunkers were in an advanced stage of completion and almost on schedule. Every one was happy and we had another week to complete.
    The project was ultimately completed on time and was one of the more successful projects in that area in the late 70’s.
    I have seen both sides. Excellent projects killed by bad reporting.
    Project disasters because of bosses being completely ignorant of massive problems due to wrong reporting. That is why projects work not because of the boss but because of the team he can pick and motivate.

    Reply
  40. Daniel Christadoss Avatar
    Daniel Christadoss

    Many years ago I worked on a massive fertilizer project in India. Most of us worked day and night to keep the project to schedule. However in projects of this size there would be inevitable delays, problems and irritants. The weekly progress meetings were held in a conference hall with a huge window facing the project. The meetings were attended by representatives of the owners, construction managers and the contractors. We were delayed in the erection of fertilizer bunkers because the purchasing agent of my company shipped only the bolts and not the nuts to secure the bunkers. The construction manager suggested that we hang the bunker walls on one side to give a completed look from the conference hall. The top boss was told that bunkers were in an advanced stage of completion and almost on schedule. Every one was happy and we had another week to complete.
    The project was ultimately completed on time and was one of the more successful projects in that area in the late 70’s.
    I have seen both sides. Excellent projects killed by bad reporting.
    Project disasters because of bosses being completely ignorant of massive problems due to wrong reporting. That is why projects work not because of the boss but because of the team he can pick and motivate.

    Reply
  41. TheLeaderLab Avatar
    TheLeaderLab

    I agree with Dan. It seems like a lot of this stems from the defensive nature of leaders. I think the competitive nature of moving up in organizations causes a lot of this. Leaders almost have to fight to attain power, as such they’re defensive and don’t want to lose power. It’s be interesting to study the difference in defensiveness and mum effect in hierarchy and non-hierarchy (Gore & Associates) type organizations.

    Reply
  42. TheLeaderLab Avatar
    TheLeaderLab

    I agree with Dan. It seems like a lot of this stems from the defensive nature of leaders. I think the competitive nature of moving up in organizations causes a lot of this. Leaders almost have to fight to attain power, as such they’re defensive and don’t want to lose power. It’s be interesting to study the difference in defensiveness and mum effect in hierarchy and non-hierarchy (Gore & Associates) type organizations.

    Reply
  43. TheLeaderLab Avatar
    TheLeaderLab

    I agree with Dan. It seems like a lot of this stems from the defensive nature of leaders. I think the competitive nature of moving up in organizations causes a lot of this. Leaders almost have to fight to attain power, as such they’re defensive and don’t want to lose power. It’s be interesting to study the difference in defensiveness and mum effect in hierarchy and non-hierarchy (Gore & Associates) type organizations.

    Reply
  44. TheLeaderLab Avatar
    TheLeaderLab

    I agree with Dan. It seems like a lot of this stems from the defensive nature of leaders. I think the competitive nature of moving up in organizations causes a lot of this. Leaders almost have to fight to attain power, as such they’re defensive and don’t want to lose power. It’s be interesting to study the difference in defensiveness and mum effect in hierarchy and non-hierarchy (Gore & Associates) type organizations.

    Reply
  45. TheLeaderLab Avatar
    TheLeaderLab

    I agree with Dan. It seems like a lot of this stems from the defensive nature of leaders. I think the competitive nature of moving up in organizations causes a lot of this. Leaders almost have to fight to attain power, as such they’re defensive and don’t want to lose power. It’s be interesting to study the difference in defensiveness and mum effect in hierarchy and non-hierarchy (Gore & Associates) type organizations.

    Reply
  46. TheLeaderLab Avatar
    TheLeaderLab

    I agree with Dan. It seems like a lot of this stems from the defensive nature of leaders. I think the competitive nature of moving up in organizations causes a lot of this. Leaders almost have to fight to attain power, as such they’re defensive and don’t want to lose power. It’s be interesting to study the difference in defensiveness and mum effect in hierarchy and non-hierarchy (Gore & Associates) type organizations.

    Reply
  47. TheLeaderLab Avatar
    TheLeaderLab

    I agree with Dan. It seems like a lot of this stems from the defensive nature of leaders. I think the competitive nature of moving up in organizations causes a lot of this. Leaders almost have to fight to attain power, as such they’re defensive and don’t want to lose power. It’s be interesting to study the difference in defensiveness and mum effect in hierarchy and non-hierarchy (Gore & Associates) type organizations.

    Reply
  48. TheLeaderLab Avatar
    TheLeaderLab

    I agree with Dan. It seems like a lot of this stems from the defensive nature of leaders. I think the competitive nature of moving up in organizations causes a lot of this. Leaders almost have to fight to attain power, as such they’re defensive and don’t want to lose power. It’s be interesting to study the difference in defensiveness and mum effect in hierarchy and non-hierarchy (Gore & Associates) type organizations.

    Reply
  49. Wally Bock Avatar
    Wally Bock

    I think this is a fairly straightforward situation. If you kill one messenger, just one, because of the message they bring, other potential messengers will take note. Self-preservation being what it is, future messengers will review the message prior to delivery to make sure all “killer” phrases are left out.
    Then, it’s like Churchill said of appeasers. They all feed the crocodile, hoping it will eat them last.

    Reply
  50. Wally Bock Avatar
    Wally Bock

    I think this is a fairly straightforward situation. If you kill one messenger, just one, because of the message they bring, other potential messengers will take note. Self-preservation being what it is, future messengers will review the message prior to delivery to make sure all “killer” phrases are left out.
    Then, it’s like Churchill said of appeasers. They all feed the crocodile, hoping it will eat them last.

    Reply
  51. Wally Bock Avatar
    Wally Bock

    I think this is a fairly straightforward situation. If you kill one messenger, just one, because of the message they bring, other potential messengers will take note. Self-preservation being what it is, future messengers will review the message prior to delivery to make sure all “killer” phrases are left out.
    Then, it’s like Churchill said of appeasers. They all feed the crocodile, hoping it will eat them last.

    Reply
  52. Wally Bock Avatar
    Wally Bock

    I think this is a fairly straightforward situation. If you kill one messenger, just one, because of the message they bring, other potential messengers will take note. Self-preservation being what it is, future messengers will review the message prior to delivery to make sure all “killer” phrases are left out.
    Then, it’s like Churchill said of appeasers. They all feed the crocodile, hoping it will eat them last.

    Reply
  53. Wally Bock Avatar
    Wally Bock

    I think this is a fairly straightforward situation. If you kill one messenger, just one, because of the message they bring, other potential messengers will take note. Self-preservation being what it is, future messengers will review the message prior to delivery to make sure all “killer” phrases are left out.
    Then, it’s like Churchill said of appeasers. They all feed the crocodile, hoping it will eat them last.

    Reply
  54. Wally Bock Avatar
    Wally Bock

    I think this is a fairly straightforward situation. If you kill one messenger, just one, because of the message they bring, other potential messengers will take note. Self-preservation being what it is, future messengers will review the message prior to delivery to make sure all “killer” phrases are left out.
    Then, it’s like Churchill said of appeasers. They all feed the crocodile, hoping it will eat them last.

    Reply
  55. Wally Bock Avatar
    Wally Bock

    I think this is a fairly straightforward situation. If you kill one messenger, just one, because of the message they bring, other potential messengers will take note. Self-preservation being what it is, future messengers will review the message prior to delivery to make sure all “killer” phrases are left out.
    Then, it’s like Churchill said of appeasers. They all feed the crocodile, hoping it will eat them last.

    Reply
  56. Wally Bock Avatar
    Wally Bock

    I think this is a fairly straightforward situation. If you kill one messenger, just one, because of the message they bring, other potential messengers will take note. Self-preservation being what it is, future messengers will review the message prior to delivery to make sure all “killer” phrases are left out.
    Then, it’s like Churchill said of appeasers. They all feed the crocodile, hoping it will eat them last.

    Reply
  57. Pat Avatar
    Pat

    1) Start by thanking people who point out when you (the boss) makes a mistake.
    2) Next admit that you ( the boss) are human and make mistakes.
    3) Lastly, tell people pointing out your mistakes that you are paying them to find solutions – not to tell you what you already know ( that you make mistakes ).

    Reply
  58. Pat Avatar
    Pat

    1) Start by thanking people who point out when you (the boss) makes a mistake.
    2) Next admit that you ( the boss) are human and make mistakes.
    3) Lastly, tell people pointing out your mistakes that you are paying them to find solutions – not to tell you what you already know ( that you make mistakes ).

    Reply
  59. Pat Avatar
    Pat

    1) Start by thanking people who point out when you (the boss) makes a mistake.
    2) Next admit that you ( the boss) are human and make mistakes.
    3) Lastly, tell people pointing out your mistakes that you are paying them to find solutions – not to tell you what you already know ( that you make mistakes ).

    Reply
  60. Pat Avatar
    Pat

    1) Start by thanking people who point out when you (the boss) makes a mistake.
    2) Next admit that you ( the boss) are human and make mistakes.
    3) Lastly, tell people pointing out your mistakes that you are paying them to find solutions – not to tell you what you already know ( that you make mistakes ).

    Reply
  61. Pat Avatar
    Pat

    1) Start by thanking people who point out when you (the boss) makes a mistake.
    2) Next admit that you ( the boss) are human and make mistakes.
    3) Lastly, tell people pointing out your mistakes that you are paying them to find solutions – not to tell you what you already know ( that you make mistakes ).

    Reply
  62. Pat Avatar
    Pat

    1) Start by thanking people who point out when you (the boss) makes a mistake.
    2) Next admit that you ( the boss) are human and make mistakes.
    3) Lastly, tell people pointing out your mistakes that you are paying them to find solutions – not to tell you what you already know ( that you make mistakes ).

    Reply
  63. Pat Avatar
    Pat

    1) Start by thanking people who point out when you (the boss) makes a mistake.
    2) Next admit that you ( the boss) are human and make mistakes.
    3) Lastly, tell people pointing out your mistakes that you are paying them to find solutions – not to tell you what you already know ( that you make mistakes ).

    Reply
  64. Pat Avatar
    Pat

    1) Start by thanking people who point out when you (the boss) makes a mistake.
    2) Next admit that you ( the boss) are human and make mistakes.
    3) Lastly, tell people pointing out your mistakes that you are paying them to find solutions – not to tell you what you already know ( that you make mistakes ).

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts