The reality of leadership failure
Edwin H. Friedman’s A Failure of Nerve “Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix” shares insights that elicit lots of questions about leadership. Friedman focuses on the Leader’s presence and differentiation instead of relying on technique or knowledge. Even though he clarifies that he is not in support of autocracy, I wonder what he would have to say about the current global leadership, the events in Russia and Ukraine, or the recent events at Capitol Hill. “I have lived and worked in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area for almost four decades. During this time, I have watched families and institutions recycle their problems for several generations, despite enormous efforts to be innovative.”[1] As I was reading, having lived around Washington D.C.’s beltway for several years now, I can imagine Friedman spending countless hours on the Beltway traffic struggling with leadership challenges. “What counts is the leader’s presence and being, not technique and know-how”[2].
The reality of leadership failure as described by Friedman is evident. The well-differentiated leader will do their best to serve in their time giving their best but solving every problem in leadership may not happen until the Prince of Peace takes charge. Friedman’s suggestion that a well-differentiated leader would take a decisive stand at the risk of displeasing others is a reminder of the recent conversation in Cape Town concerning consensus leadership. Friedman adds that unhealthy emotional family systems contribute to most of the chronic anxiety as seen in the whole culture.
Rick Warren in Lead like Jesus says that “the purpose of influence is to speak up for those who have no influence.”[3] As he shares about the stewardship of influence Rick brings insights from the prayer of King Solomon in Psalm 72 and concludes he would spend the rest of his life serving those who do not have that influence.
Isn’t that the kind of leadership that Jesus would endorse? As a Jewish Rabbi, a politician, and an organizational consultant, Friedman must have attempted his best to bring about the kind of leadership contribution he could. Since the book was not completed till after his death, there is a chance he was writing with the understanding that his time here and contribution would be coming soon to an end. Friedman’s writing reveals disappointment in America’s leadership describing it as “stuck in the rut of trying harder and harder without obtaining significantly new results”[4] There is also a mention of the new season of renewal or renaissance and other adventures. Does Friedman describe these as the kind of leadership to imitate? These brought to memory stories of conquest where the so-called explorers attempted or succeeded in exterminating natives for their selfish ends.
[1] Edwin H. Friedman, A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix, ed. Margaret M. Treadwell and Edward W. Beal, 10th anniversary revised edition. (New York: Church Publishing, 2017).
[2] Ibid.
[3] Lead like Jesus Classics, The Why and the How of Leadership with Rick Warren, n.d., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1hiNDE_2nk.
[4] Friedman, A Failure of Nerve.
About the Author
Jean de Dieu Ndahiriwe
Jean de Dieu Ndahiriwe is a Clinical Correctional Chaplain and former Child Refugee from War-torn Rwanda. A member of the Maxwell Leadership Certified Team, Jean is passionate about Servant Leadership and looks forward to seeing more leaders that inspire Lasting Peace and Justice for all, especially "the least of these".4 responses to “The reality of leadership failure”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
“Friedman’s suggestion that a well-differentiated leader would take a decisive stand at the risk of displeasing others is a reminder of the recent conversation in Cape Town concerning consensus leadership.”
I’d love for you to break down your correlation here more. Within Cape Town -are you referring to political leaders, spiritual leaders, community members or all three?
Conscious leadership by definition is to be radically responsible, self aware…but it also focuses on creating a community of we rather then me.
How do you think we can translate those two critical pieces (Conscious Leadership and Differentiated Leadership) back to the states? Do you see evidence of the two here too?
Dr. Zondi’s conversation on leadership by consensus was on my mind. “Leadership Bankruptcy,” as observed, is happening all around us, including here in the US. A Conscious leadership Culture would be the remedy to current leadership challenges. I don’t see it yet in action, I hear the talk in most cases, but authentic, conscious leadership in action is still lacking.
Jean,
It seems like Friedman’s book stirred up many memories and various thoughts on leadership based on your personal observations. I must say the book raised a lot of questions for me. One of which is the use of the early explorers as heroes who helped usher in the Renaissance Age. As you stated, the “extermination of natives for selfish means” was completely overlooked.
Do you think that this speaks to a leadership style that is autocratic and narcissistic?
Yes,
I thought of the untold atrocities done by some of these “heroes” in their explorations. I was looking at what they did as they ventured into the Americas and other parts of the world. There must be a relationship between these heroic explorations, new world discoveries, and those events fresh in our minds like colonialism, apartheid, slave trade, civil war, etc. These wars for conquest and exploration for acquisition wreaked havoc in some parts of the world the consequences might last for a very long time.