Thursday, March 25, 2004
Leadership: The Law of Solid Ground
Before you act, prepare the leaders/people in your group for what you are about to do. If they are prepared, they will trust you.
If you make sure the people you are trying to lead know what is going on, they are less likely to react badly when you attempt to implement a strategy toward acheiving your goal(s).
| If you make sure the people you are trying to lead know what is going on, they are less likely to react badly when you attempt to implement a strategy toward acheiving your goal(s).
Leadership: The Law of E.F. Hutton
Find the real leaders, people follow them. Follow a better leader if you find one and learn from them. Influence the real leaders, and you will influence more people than if you attempt to find followers to influence.
This chapter is about how to be a leader. It takes the what, influence, as a given and explores who you should influence if you want to be a strong leader.
| This chapter is about how to be a leader. It takes the what, influence, as a given and explores who you should influence if you want to be a strong leader.
Leadership: The Law of Navigation
Navigators see the road ahead. They know where they are going. They believe in their vision. They learn from the past, and they listen to others.
The acronym PLAN AHEAD is a guide for applying the law of navigation:
Pre-determine a course of action.
Lay out your goals.
Adjust your priorities.
Notify key personnel.
Allow time for acceptance.
Head into action.
Expect problems.
Always point to the successes.
Daily review your plan.
This chapter focuses on what leadership is by showing how you take steps toward acheiving your goals.
| The acronym PLAN AHEAD is a guide for applying the law of navigation:
Pre-determine a course of action.
Lay out your goals.
Adjust your priorities.
Notify key personnel.
Allow time for acceptance.
Head into action.
Expect problems.
Always point to the successes.
Daily review your plan.
This chapter focuses on what leadership is by showing how you take steps toward acheiving your goals.
The Value Of Leadership
Hi,
I read John Maxwell's "The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership." I intend over the next several weeks to publish my notes chapter by chapter in preparation for reviewing the book.
Chapter I: The Law of The Lid
The essence of the law of the lid is that as a leader, I can accomplish more than I can working alone. By influencing others to accomplish what I want to accomplish I can utilize the resources of many people and thus, acheive much more.
Chapter II. The Law of Influence
What is leadership? Leadership is influence. It's the ability to motivate people to move in the direction that you want them to go.
"The essence of all power to influence lies in getting the other person to participate."
Chapter III. The Law of Process
Leadership is a process. You must work at it every day. Leaders work/study to become better leaders. Ultimately, this leads to the idea that leaders are made.
So the first three chapters answer: Why value leadership? What is leadership? and Where do leaders come from?
I will point out here that hierachically there is an error in the chapter ordering. Explaining why leadership is important is difficult if you don't know what leadership is. But basically, these are the three most important questions that need answering at the beginning of such a book. What is it, why is it important, and what can I do about it?
| I read John Maxwell's "The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership." I intend over the next several weeks to publish my notes chapter by chapter in preparation for reviewing the book.
Chapter I: The Law of The Lid
The essence of the law of the lid is that as a leader, I can accomplish more than I can working alone. By influencing others to accomplish what I want to accomplish I can utilize the resources of many people and thus, acheive much more.
Chapter II. The Law of Influence
What is leadership? Leadership is influence. It's the ability to motivate people to move in the direction that you want them to go.
"The essence of all power to influence lies in getting the other person to participate."
Chapter III. The Law of Process
Leadership is a process. You must work at it every day. Leaders work/study to become better leaders. Ultimately, this leads to the idea that leaders are made.
So the first three chapters answer: Why value leadership? What is leadership? and Where do leaders come from?
I will point out here that hierachically there is an error in the chapter ordering. Explaining why leadership is important is difficult if you don't know what leadership is. But basically, these are the three most important questions that need answering at the beginning of such a book. What is it, why is it important, and what can I do about it?
Do you still beat your wife, Mr. Dean?
The arbitrary is the assertion of something in the absence of any evidence to support such a claim.
Cognitively, such claims have neither true, nor false status, the arbitrary is in a category by itself.
In order for a claim to be regarded as true, or false, there must be some specific evidence to point to and say, he's properly identified it, or he hasn't. The nature of cognition requires evidence first, then conceptually identifying what the evidence is, or what it means. To correctly assess the evidence is to arrive at a true conclusion, to incorrectly do so is to arrive at a false conclusion. To attempt to arbitrarily assert something in the absence of evidence takes us outside of the rational. It takes us outside of reality and into the realm of boundless, pie-in-the-sky fantasy.
When Howard Dean forwarded the theory that President Bush might have known about 9/11 before the attacks took place he was dealing in the arbitrary. He didn't present any evidence to support such a claim. In fact, he attempted to forward the theory without forwarding the theory by claiming that "some people say its true." Such a claim, about such an issue is a blatant indulgence of the arbitrary.
More recently, Mr. Dean has forwarded the theory that the 3/11 attacks are the responsibility of President Bush. Or that's what "they're" saying anyway. They, in this case, is Al Qaeda. Apparently, Howard Dean is now their representative. Now leaving aside the fact that Al Qaeda wants to destroy all non-muslim countries, and the last time I checked George W. Bush was not responsible for the secularization of Spain. The important thing to note here is that Mr. Dean offers no proof for his theory. When asked whether he believed it, he simply referred back to the fact that someone else was saying it.
So if someone is making statements which have no cognitive status. Which are literally outside of the realm of the rational. What could be the purpose for such flights of fantasy? I would contend that Dean is operating on two basic premises. 1) He wants George Bush to lose and is willing to do anything to make that happen. And 2) He's counting on the fact that most people wouldn't recognize blatant anti-rationality when it was thrown in their faces.
While such statements have no validity, they can serve a purpose. They can, through repetition, be spread among the population and confuse the unwary, who assuming that there must be some basis for such statements look for refutation which is both unnecessary, and because of the nature of the claims, frequently difficult to address.(For instance, how could George W. Bush, or the Saudi's ever prove that he didn't know about 9/11 beforehand?) The net result is the undermining of President Bush's ability to be re-elected by intellectually dishonest means.
Those who would seek to influence, or motivate others by means of undercutting their ability to form valid judgements about their lives, and the decisions which they make which will effect them are attempting to replace their judgement of how things should be done politically. Such a tactic can only be motivated by those who wish to rule over others. A leader who wants freedom for his people doesn't attempt to trick them into doing something. He gives them the information necessary to make decisions for themselves, the ability to exercise one's independent judgement is the essence of political freedom.
Fortunately, Mr. Dean managed to alienate himself from the voters and thus lost the democratic nomination for the Presidency. At this point, he would appear to be doing the Democrats dirty work. If the Dems find such thuggery acceptable, I have to wonder what motivates Senator Kerry's bid for the White House?
| Cognitively, such claims have neither true, nor false status, the arbitrary is in a category by itself.
In order for a claim to be regarded as true, or false, there must be some specific evidence to point to and say, he's properly identified it, or he hasn't. The nature of cognition requires evidence first, then conceptually identifying what the evidence is, or what it means. To correctly assess the evidence is to arrive at a true conclusion, to incorrectly do so is to arrive at a false conclusion. To attempt to arbitrarily assert something in the absence of evidence takes us outside of the rational. It takes us outside of reality and into the realm of boundless, pie-in-the-sky fantasy.
When Howard Dean forwarded the theory that President Bush might have known about 9/11 before the attacks took place he was dealing in the arbitrary. He didn't present any evidence to support such a claim. In fact, he attempted to forward the theory without forwarding the theory by claiming that "some people say its true." Such a claim, about such an issue is a blatant indulgence of the arbitrary.
More recently, Mr. Dean has forwarded the theory that the 3/11 attacks are the responsibility of President Bush. Or that's what "they're" saying anyway. They, in this case, is Al Qaeda. Apparently, Howard Dean is now their representative. Now leaving aside the fact that Al Qaeda wants to destroy all non-muslim countries, and the last time I checked George W. Bush was not responsible for the secularization of Spain. The important thing to note here is that Mr. Dean offers no proof for his theory. When asked whether he believed it, he simply referred back to the fact that someone else was saying it.
So if someone is making statements which have no cognitive status. Which are literally outside of the realm of the rational. What could be the purpose for such flights of fantasy? I would contend that Dean is operating on two basic premises. 1) He wants George Bush to lose and is willing to do anything to make that happen. And 2) He's counting on the fact that most people wouldn't recognize blatant anti-rationality when it was thrown in their faces.
While such statements have no validity, they can serve a purpose. They can, through repetition, be spread among the population and confuse the unwary, who assuming that there must be some basis for such statements look for refutation which is both unnecessary, and because of the nature of the claims, frequently difficult to address.(For instance, how could George W. Bush, or the Saudi's ever prove that he didn't know about 9/11 beforehand?) The net result is the undermining of President Bush's ability to be re-elected by intellectually dishonest means.
Those who would seek to influence, or motivate others by means of undercutting their ability to form valid judgements about their lives, and the decisions which they make which will effect them are attempting to replace their judgement of how things should be done politically. Such a tactic can only be motivated by those who wish to rule over others. A leader who wants freedom for his people doesn't attempt to trick them into doing something. He gives them the information necessary to make decisions for themselves, the ability to exercise one's independent judgement is the essence of political freedom.
Fortunately, Mr. Dean managed to alienate himself from the voters and thus lost the democratic nomination for the Presidency. At this point, he would appear to be doing the Democrats dirty work. If the Dems find such thuggery acceptable, I have to wonder what motivates Senator Kerry's bid for the White House?
