Top Ten Marks of Lousy Leaders
Image source
David Lewis, co-author of The Pin Drop Principle, told me he was exposed to poor leadership when he was in his early twenties.
“Back then everything was a race and all that mattered was the numbers. In that context customers are statistics.” Lewis explained.
It’s been over a month since our conversation and I’m still thinking about the damage poor leaders wreak on others. David said, “They didn’t teach me the importance of working together.”
It’s about attitude:
In politics, Bill Clinton said, “It’s the economy, stupid.” In leadership it’s the attitude, stupid.
Lousy leadership begins with self-protective attitudes not lack of skills, intelligence, or talent.
Lousy leaders:
- Need to know more than others.
- Can’t explore for fear of being wrong.
- Won’t ask obvious questions for fear of looking dumb.
- Need their egos stroked.
- Wonder who’s out to get them.
- Fear high performers; they need the spotlight.
- Struggle to collaborate.
- Won’t change their minds.
- Feel isolated and alone.
- Sacrifice long-term success for short-term profits.
Lousy leaders can’t serve others because they serve themselves.
Hope:
All leaders screw up. But great leaders possess right attitudes even when they fall short.
- Humility.
- Optimism.
- Curiosity.
- Endurance.
- Tenacity.
- Compassion.
- Responsibility.
Leaders matter most when they help others learn to help others.
Lewis said he’d learned that “success is not just about the numbers.” It’s a challenging statement because numbers matter. Skill, talent, and intelligence also matter. Attitude matters most.
What bad attitudes do bad leaders possess?
What leadership attitudes do you most admire?
Not surprisingly coming from me :), I suggest that a bad attitude includes avoiding interpersonal conflict and demonstrating a resistance to engaging in it – or managing conflict from a position of power ‘over’.
Two of the leadership attitides I admire most are flexibilty and openness to listening and learning.
Thank you Cinnie.
We all need to get to the place where we face tough issues with confidence, tenderness, and honesty. It’s a tipping point in all leaders.
And really bad ones cause the conflict…
I love this blog. Thank you so much for sharing all your knowledge, all the best from Amsterdam.
Thank you Cinephiliaa and best success in Amsterdam.
GREAT list! You could sum it up with one word…PRIDE!!! Proverbs 16:18 makes it clear: “Pride comes before destruction, and an arrogant spirit before a fall.”
Thank you Dwayne.
Arrogance always takes us to dark places.
I agree: arrogance – and to it I would add selfishness. Underlay them both with an inability to delay gratification and seems like the essence of all 10 items in this excellent list might be captured. Gotta wonder how many “Lousy Leaders” got the notation “does not share well with others” from their teachers in kindergarten.
Thanks for posting both lists – great food for thought.
Good post as always Dan. The biggest issue I see is their insecurity especially around other high-performers and over-achievers. Their paranoia and need to be right can often override common sense, truth and relationship. The problem is that they will either stifle the growth of the high-performers (and others) around them or drive them away; instead of embracing what they have to offer to the benefit of the organization and themselves.
Martina
Thank you Martina.
Everyone loses when lousy leaders prevail. Sounds like insecurity is a self fulfilling prophecy. We fear that others might succeed too much but in the end we don’t succeed.
I realize that the damage poor leaders “reek” on others might be smelly, but “wreak” would be a better spelling for that word in this context. Spot on observations. I am enjoying and attending to your posts. They contain many kernels of wisdom. Diane M
Thank you Diane. I appreciate the help.
Kernel Dan…you got a promotion! 😉
Dear Dan,
I agree that lousy leaders create attitude that protect their interest. In fact they create camouflage to deceive others. They have self centered approach for their success. I also agree that today organization measures success in terms of numbers. But there are triggers that drive that number. And those numbers are more important than just numbers. I believe bad leaders possess skill that is intentionally selfish. This is the reason why their growth is limited. Good leaders on the other hands, have broader approach. They know that success is a team concept and that is why they focus on development of people in the team. When they do so, organization automatically succeed and achieve numbers.
Thank you Ajay.
As always I grab a nugget from your contribution that brings clarity. Selfishness limits growth because it hinders or prevents team work. Bingo!
The common focus of the bad leadership traits is that they demonstrate caring more about serving/loving themselves than about making the organization a success.
The common focus of good leaders is that they devote themselves to the cause of their organization.
The role of a leader is not to be served, but to facilitate the success of the organization they serve, to love its people, and to espouse its mission.
Thank you Marc.
I love the word “devote” in your comment. It’s powerful and suggest devotion which implies an emotional connection.
The irony, Marc, is that the behavior they engage in clearly demonstrates they DON’T actually love themselves… if they did, they would be kind enough with themselves to focus outward and on their team members and the organization they are (ostensibly) serving…. LoL!
Hi Dan,
I love the list, and your questions evoke the following from me:
I’ve come to believe that if a leader isn’t encouraging the continual development of self-leadership, and by extension, a leadership attitude in others, they are simply not really leading.
Any team that is overly dependent on it’s leader for decision-making, is either a part of a dysfunctional culture, wherein a good leader will soon be a gone one, or has an immature or poor leader suffering under one or more of the conditions in your lousy leader list.
On the positive side, I feel that good leaders develop an inner sense of what I call “appropriate action.” You and I have talked about this before: when a leader is in a state where they are sensing appropriate action, “the numbers” are but one set of inputs, and are by no means the only ones used in decision-making.
Last but not least, I get picky about saying that leaders “do damage.” If we are under a leader who is not a leader, where is our choice in the matter? Respectfully, I’d say it is with us, and that’s where it always was.
To give up our personal leadership by buying into the illusion that a leader controls everything, or worse, by giving up our physical ability to choose something different than the leader, or situation we have, we empower poor leaders to continue, and thus continue our illusion of powerlessness.
No thanks.
I’m much more comfortable with saying, “I’m often surprised at how much we’ll tolerate from a poor leader—often giving away our own power of choice, and waiting far too long—out of fear, or a sense of powerlessness—before we challenge, or make new choices for ourselves.” In this way of thinking, we take some ownership and power for better choices of both work, and leadership. 🙂
All the best,
Mark
Thank you Mark.
I’m always thankful to see you’ve contributed to the conversation. Love the idea of taking personal responsibility.
From a positional orientation, we expect more from those with more responsibility. We hold them to higher standards. Is this ok? I think so. If we don’t or can’t we don’t make room for people to grow. All of that to say, I’m leaving the door open to lay the blame on leaders more than others within the organization.
Hi Dan,
You wrote:
“From a positional orientation, we expect more from those with more responsibility. We hold them to higher standards. Is this ok? I think so.”
Good distinction, and I think so too, in this sense: if by “more” you mean additional in organizational/process/people scope.
But if by “more” you mean “of greater importance to my desired outcomes than my own self-accountability” (which I doubt you do), then I disagree.
Of course, there is great room for discussion of additional qualification, dimension, and nuance on this topic!
As far as blame is concerned, I think I read you as meaning “holding accountable” with that word. Yes, we will hold leaders more accountable than others, but I generally associate “blame” with something more negative… more like an abdication of ANY ownership, accompanied by punishment.
However natural and even justifiable the latter might prove, I have trouble thinking of any situation where such an attitude helps us—especially with our internal lives—when we look at it’s effect over time. It’s counter-intuitive, buy I by into the idea that self-accountablity at all levels actually reduces stress and improves performance over time.
~M
LOL… that last sentence should read “but I buy into” not “buy I by into.” Hahaha… feel free to edit and delete this! 🙂
Another great one, Dan. It helps when they CARE, too. Ha.
Great points, all. Do you think these lousy leaders ever read these posts ? I hope so. Maybe they can put their ego’s aside and actually try and practice;
1.Humility.2.Optimism.3.Curiosity.4.Endurance.5.Tenacity.
6.Compassion.7.Responsibility. and CARE.
Thanks Dan the Man. Love this.
Al
Thank you Al,
Great addition to the list…how could I miss something so important? I appreciate the good word.
Al,
Even if a ‘bad’ leader reads these posts, I suspect many of them don’t have enough self-awareness to see that they are truly a lousy leader. Or in an even worse scenario, they know they are a bad leader but don’t care.
When I work with people, I have a joke, that’s not really a joke.. When people thank me and oo-and-ah about how I help them, I say simply, “I live to serve.”
This is with guide my leadership – the idea of the servant leader. With every tough call, every decisive moment, it has to be about what will help the people whom I serve – what others may call the people who work for me.
This is what lousy leaders miss – the idea of service. All the great platitudes we quote to get through the day – “Lead from the front”, “Failure is not an option”, these all have the idea of doing what you can to make the people you work with more effective and yes, happier though their work day.
If we’re smart about it, we have the opportunity, what I see as the duty, to not just help people be better workers, but to help them be better people.
Sorry, that second paragraph should start with “This is WHAT guides my leadership.”
Thank you Joe.
You got me thinking about the connection between the tough calls and servant leadership. It’s so true that having the tough conversations is always about whats best for others and the organization. Lousy leaders make toughness about themselves.
Very good article. What many of these traits remind me of is good leaders trying to lead in a negative and paranoid work culture. In a culture where creativity is squelched, conflict is managed like misbehavior a leader becomes good at reading the currents rather than leading people. So, it is helps to consider the context in which the leader is leading.
Thank you Posprin.
Can’t minimize the importance of context, for sure. The flip side of this is leaders change paranoid work cultures… its tedious and hard but over time they do.
Agreed. An effective leader is not co-dependent, so to speak, with the culture, but enlightens and makes change happen. Good words, “tedious” and “hard” though.
I find it so sad when people have to work under a “leader” wo think they know it all and you just need to follow them. I very much admire a leader who is passionate about the individual growth of their follower so that they may reach their full potential.
Thank you Tina.
I enjoy the clarity of “passionate about the growth of their follower.” Thats great focus.
It is and it creates loyal followers that create loyal followers… 🙂
Dan –this is one of the greatest ,hard hitting, to the point messages on leadership I have read!!!
Thank you Gene. A good word feels great.
You know Dan, in Oregon, there is this gastropod that, wherever it goes, it leaves a trail, a sticky, nasty slime trail. Where some states have state birds or flowers, some say that the slug is the state mollusk here. The residual slime trail that lousy leaders leave is very messy and the leaders are often oblivious to their own trail.
Anyone out there going, ‘ewwwwww’ right now? 😉
Geez, I am sure glad I have NEVER EVER had any of those traits of lousy leaders…wait, wait, Dan, move away from that mirror, not the mirror…nnnoooo, the horror! Yep, been there, modeled that. While leadership skill set acquisition is organic and hopefully evolving in a positive manner, certainly have gotten waylaid by those negative traits and trails.
As far as leadership traits that I admire, leaders that publicly own and clean up their trail o’ debris score well. And those that step in and help others clean up their messes, wow! Those often are the nugget moments of learning for us all.
Thank you Doc.
You’ve written a Trail of Two Cities… one for slime balls and one for those who have the courage to look in the mirror… who IS the fairest of them all???
Love you you carried the “trail” metaphor to the end with cleaning up your own slimy trail…
You know that all these post touch my own life… any one who has led for any length of time has acted in like the gastropod.. (dang how can the word slug sound so fantastic?) … Good news is, as you indicate, failure isn’t final if we face it.
Dan,
A great post. I’m finding the comments really interesting, as usual!
I just tweeted your final sentence from above (with due credit of course) because it’s such an important thing to remember “…failure isn’t final if we face it.”
Awesome!
Hi Dan – not commented in a while but still read everyone you write! However, this was such a poignant article in the context of how I am trying to support one colleague in particular at this time that I just had to write and say a big THANK YOU! You articulated those thoughts beautifully and succinctly and I appreciate that very much!
Take care and kind regards
John
Thank you John.
Man you know how to encourage a guy! Best success to you.
Bad Attitude – Failing to understand the “Other” side of the story.
Admirable Attitude – Making decisions.
Thank you Jim.
You are more concise than me! Well said my friend.
We’ve all worked for some clown who has measured up (or down) to your list at one time or another. The irony is.. what is the manager like who promoted HIM to manager? Seems one begats the other; the spreading of the “bad seed”. Everyone can screw up being a manager but not everyone can be a manager. This reminds me of an old military bromide I recall..
“We are the unwilling, led by the unqualified, to do the unnecessary, for the ungrateful.”
By the way, Dan.. James Carvelle is attributed to having first coined, “It’s the economy stupid.” (actually a variant of it) back when he was working for Clinton. Here’s a link that might help. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_the_economy,_stupid
It doesn’t change a thing about your message.. just tossing it out for accuracy. As usual.. your posts make me ponder.
Thank you Doug.
You reminded me that bad seed produces bad fruit. For example, leaders/managers who manipulate with office politics also end up with lots of politicians on their teams… It seems manipulators either admire other manipulators or they are susceptible to being manipulated.
I always appreciate it when people expand the content and/or correct my spelling or grammar errors. Thanks for adding a point of clairity.
Interesting you mention office politics, Dan. I think we all tend to view this… process… as a negative in the workplace. It thwarts, stifles, and seemingly turns the office environment into something cutthroat. On the other hand, if we examine “office politics” a little closer you will find that this is simply a label for us all living in a world of different personal agendas. There may be one goal, but ask ten people how to meet that goal and you will likely get ten different answers. In other words, office politics is a norm and not necessarily a negative. If anything, office politics is just a label for bad communication. Thusly, it seems to me that an effective manager will know how to also manage office politics by understanding the personal needs of his/her subordinates and directing their efforts to meet those needs, rather than leaving them to flail around aimlessly and disrupt everyone’s process toward meeting the goal. Don’t fight office politics but rather embrace it by proper direction.
I hear you Doug and love your take on the subject. Taken in a positive way office politics is an expression of effective and healthy communication. I’m using it in the manipulative sense. People doing or saying things for selfish reasons that make themselves look good and others look bad. In that senses it’s real…it sucks…it destroys morale…wastes time…
If any readers want an eye-opening perspective, I HIGHLY recommend that you go to iTunes and subscribe to Andy Stanley’s Leadership Podcast and listen to the episode entitled, “Integrity.” It is very revealing in this regard…He refers to these leaders as “Intoxicated Leaders”…GREAT stuff!!!
Thank you Dwayne.
Stanley’s stuff rocks.
I’ve been an avid reader of your blog but it’s the first time I’ve made a comment. 🙂 Thank you so much for sharing! This is brilliant. I’m not a leader yet but I want to be a great one when that happens and this is extremely helpful! In my short working history, I’ve realized that the leaders I admire the most were also capable of empathy.
Thank you Suyen…I hope you come back soon.
You have my best wishes for your success.
Lousy leaders still can have suitable organizations where they can perform better.
Thank you Deepak.
Is there always hope?
Reblogged this on Mr. Rommie Blog and commented:
This is so true… and so obviuous you’d think that everyone knows that. Unfortunately bad leaders attract each other, so one in high position will employ another a bit lower in organisational hierarchy…
Dan, what a great list! Unfortunately Mr. Rommie’s statement is also true, that bad leaders attract each other. Many years ago, I worked for someone who needed their ego stroked constanty, also wondering out who will get them, hating any of their employees getting more recognition than them. Someone so terribly insecure, and in a position of power. This type of leadership, when tolerated, leads to the poisoning of the whole work environment.
The behaviours likely started in the home when they were growing up. It’s the responsibility of other leaders in the workplace to correct this.
Could I add “face time” as a subcategory for your list? It relates to several of those items, but it’s an action that is required for those other things to really be real.
A leader I have to work with regularly loves to use email and massive meetings to get things done. I received a meeting invite from her that was followed by a massive email trail of invitees asking what the meeting was about and not getting an answer because the leader didn’t know. She didn’t take the time to sit face to face (or even on the phone) with the person and talk about it. When I scrolled to the bottom of the trail I saw the question and who had asked it. I then went to that person and had it cleared up in 2 minutes. Then I went to the leader and updated her.
If she could be humble, curious, and responsible enough to leave her office and talk to people face to face, she would be a better leader.
Goood 🙂 Very excellent article.