Kofi Annan's INTERVENTIONS - reminds me of role definition by Martin Udogie

I’m reading INTERVENTIONS by Kofi Annan. It was recently recommended by Fareed Zakaria on GPS, the CNN programme he anchors. Currently my best TV programme.



INTERVENTIONS is a memoir.



It was not too long ago that I came to understand the meaning of Memoir. It is an account of a person pertaining to a specific period of his life. It is different from a person’s life history, called Biography, or Autobiography, if written by the person himself or herself.



INTERVENTIONS covers the over 40 years of Kofi Annan’s service to the United Nations, the last ten as Secretary-General.



I am particularly interested in the book because of what I once stumbled upon as the role of UN Secretary-General. When the UN was established immediately after the Second World War, the world powers did not want whoever was going to head the body to be powerful. They didn’t want an unelected, unaccountable and uncontrollable World President.



So they deliberately defined the role of the Secretary-General of the United Nations to be merely, “chief administrative officer” of the organisation. A glorified clerk, if you like.



Some who occupied this role, played by this restrictive job description, and had uneventful tenures.



Until the unforgettable Swede, Dag Hammarskjold became the Secretary-General in 1953. He was bold, courageous, and fearless. He would admonish, cajole, threaten, etc. He was, yes, uncontrollable.



Whenever he was reminded that he was a mere administrative officer, it was said that he would respond thus: Forget my job description. My job title says Secretary-General. I am both Secretary and a General. There is so much this allows me to do.



Mr. Dag Hammarskjold died while still in office, in a helicopter crash in Congo, in what some believe may not have been entirely an accident.



Now, let’s see how Kofi Annan played his role…



Did you know that Mr. Kofi Annan set the school record for the 100m sprint for his university in the U.S? He was also the drummer for the college musical group, and was a member of Ambassadors for Friendship, a small group of students sent out every year to tour the nooks and crannies of the United States.



He was certainly not a “Triangular Student.”



Warm regards!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Martin Udogie is Founder & Publisher of BottomLINE Newsletter based in Nigeria. Readers can contact him directly by email through: udogie@yahoo.com

Every Poll Was Wrong - It's A Landslide! by Lucira Jane Nebelung

Here it is, November 7, 2012. We the people of the United States have elected our President and Congress. Every poll was wrong - it's a landslide! How did we get here?


After the final Presidential debate a couple of weeks ago, something remarkable began to happen. We realized that our freedom requires awareness because with awareness we have real choice. We realized that once we stopped listening to the noise, we could see that what we were paying attention to really didn't matter. We started dropping our beliefs and labels of Republican and Democrat and opening our eyes and minds to see ourselves and the candidates as we are as people.

We began questioning the real importance of hard and fast positions on the issues and ideologies. We saw that the ideologies such as capitalism, liberalism, conservatism, and fundamentalism are not what made this country great. These beliefs about how life should be separate rather than unite us and do not provide long-term solutions. We saw that imposing our beliefs and choices on others violates everyone's freedom, including our own. We recognized that what was most important about this election is leadership and integrity and began looking closely at the candidates themselves and how they lead their lives.

We realized that we have a mixed view of what it means to be a leader. We used the term loosely. We called anyone with a position of authority a leader. We called people leaders when they commit to an ideology, policy or profits. We called people leaders when they appear "in control of" and dominating situations.

We saw that many people who we have called leaders have their own rules: focus on accumulating and maintaining wealth and power; take action based on self-serving self-interest and personal gain; and exploit and manipulate people, resources, systems, and situations.

We decided enough is enough. We decided to stop playing by these rules that don't serve our individual or collective dignity and well-being as human beings. We realized that if a candidate followed and managed by these rules or ideology, they aren't leading and they lack integrity. We recognized that we ourselves contributed to everything that we complain about by our complacency and conformity. We recognized that it is our responsibility for creating the future we want for ourselves. We decided to stop giving our power away.

We decided that public protests are slow to bring about change so we began looking within ourselves for answers. We stopped paying attention to what the campaigns and polls and media were saying and listened instead to what we know to be true in our hearts as people. We realized that what made this country great is our diversity and standing for the dignity and well-being and freedom of all people, everywhere.

We realized that we want true leadership that brings us together and moves us forward. We decided to drop the ideological paths that limit our vision, blind us to possibilities, and force one viewpoint or choice on the rest of us. We realized that leaders create unity in diversity with shared power and where all benefit.

We recognized that above all, leaders are people who demonstrate the best in us as human beings, our virtues. Leaders show us the polarities that divide us and bring us to the higher truth of a situation, one that establishes common ground and serves the greatest good. We chose as leaders those who we trust will come together, collaborate and move forward with the best solutions for all of us and the future well-being of our children and our children's children.

We decided that true leaders: * Care about everyone's dignity and well-being as human beings and bringing forth our best. We sought leaders who appreciate us as people, our hopes and dreams, and who focus on generating shared power and prosperity. * Understand without judgment, accepting each of us and what we believe. We sought leaders who appreciate what our lives are like and who seek and value all perspectives. * Respect without control, granting the freedom to choose. We sought leaders who appreciate that we know what is best for us and who take action based on our interdependence to create sustainable advantage for everyone and everything. * Respond in the present, within our current context. We sought leaders who appreciate what was learned from the past and who move forward with inspiration for our shared future. We sought leaders who act with wisdom.

We recognized that it is care, understanding, respect, and responsiveness that invite us to follow, even if we might not fully agree. We appreciate that leaders have a broader perspective, a bigger picture view with the potential to address all interests.

We sought leaders who blame and criticize no one, hide and avoid nothing, take personal responsibility and accept the consequences of past choices and actions. We sought leaders whose thoughts, feelings, words, actions are consistent across every interaction, both public and private, and reflect the best in us as human beings. This is integrity. This is who we can trust.

We realized that in today's volatile world we need thoughtful leaders and for the United States to be a world leader we must care about, understand and respect others' choices as nations even when we might not make the same choices for ourselves. We recognized the United States can lead on the world stage only when we enter into dialogue rather than control by physical force. We voted to set an example and send a message to the rest of the world that what made us great as a nation is our stand for freedom and equality, human rights and shared power, and the opportunity for a ­­­­­­­­­­­­­better quality of life when we all work together and contribute our best.

We recognized that the President and Congress are stewards: Of the people, by the people, and for the people. We elect them to focus on what's possible, the big picture, and higher truths: Power to the people as we lead our lives. Common ground. Greater good. Care. Understanding. Respect. Responsiveness.

Our votes reflected what we value. We value human dignity and well-being for all. We value freedom for everyone in all aspects of life. We value wisdom. We value integrity. We value common ground and serving the greater good. Most importantly, we value our own worth and power, that we each make a difference. We voted in record numbers.

Today we are breathing a collective sigh of relief. We made the best choices for ourselves as a nation and for our place in the world. In the end, we voted only for those who showed they can rise above politics and get things done that enhance the quality of life for all. In the end, we decided to trust in truth and we voted for those who clearly value people over things, actions over words, and all of us together rather than just some of us. In the end, WE won.

What will November 7 bring? What story will we be telling? How will we vote? Will we rise to the occasion and choose the best in us as human beings whether we agree with everything or not? This is our defining moment.

<>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>

Lucira Jane Nebelung is a Faculty member of the Center for Leadership Studies, The Graduate Institute, and Founder & Principal of "Leading as Love". She wrote in from Norwich, Connecticut Area.

<>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>

Articles for publication must have full contact details, including name, address and telephone number of sender and sent by email to: onlinewoolwich@yahoo.co.uk.

Beware of these 3 Myths in the Fed Budget by Martin Udogie

In 1967, in a paper titled Socialism and Rural Development, Julius Nyerere of Tanzania laid out his proposals to establish self-sufficient socialist villages across the country. In what was to become a “villagising” movement, he began compelling people to live and work in the village, declaring that “To live in a village is an order”.



“Between 1973 and 1977, some 11 million people were placed in new villages, in what amounted to the largest mass movement in Africa’s history.



It was a disastrous policy that the country is still reeling from today.



At about the same time, Singapore was modernizing its country, also forcefully herding people, including farmers with their chickens or pigs, petty traders, the poor, etc into gleaming skyscrapers.



Today, Singapore, with just 4 million people, is richer than Britain having grown its GDP per capita from about $300 to over $35,000.



That Agriculture holds the key to Nigeria’s economic transformation is one of the three myths I address in my article that will appear in Business Day, tomorrow, Friday, October 26. You can lso access it online at www.buinessdayonline.com.



If our agriculture strategy is aimed at cutting our high import bill, then it is a sound policy. But it is NOT the solution to youth unemployment. This is because no graduate youth, having spent 4 – 5 years in the university, will go back to subsistence farming. It will not happen. And commercial farming is NOT labour intensive.



As I always say, don’t take my word for it. Let’s hear from the experts who have studied this phenomenon:



Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner in their book, Super Freaknomics write as follows:



“In the late 18th Century America, it took 19 out of 20 workers to feed the country’s inhabitants and provide a surplus for export, according to economist Milton Friedman. Two hundred years later, only 1 of 20 American workers was needed to feed a larger population, while also making the United States the largest single exporter of food in the world.”



What happened? Agricultural revolution gave way to the industrial Revolution.



China is also copying and pasting, the Singaporean strategy. “There is no better way of generating economic growth and raising per capita income than generating industrial jobs for rural inhabitants. That’s exactly what happened in China during the last two decades, as peasants left their fields to work in the factories of the eastern and southern coasts.” – from The China Strategy by Edward Tse.



Look out for Business Day tomorrow, Friday, October 26th for the full article.



Happy holidays!



Martin Udogie

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Martin Udogie is Founder & Publisher of BottomLINE Newsletter based in Nigeria.



Readers can contact him directly by email through: udogie@yahoo.com

THE CHALLENGES OF LEADING WITH UNCONDITIONAL LOVE by Benson Agoha

Academics and Leaders of thought are watching and listening as the argument rages.

One school of thought, the proponents of Unconditional Love (UL) in Leadership, say it is practicable. On the opposite side are those who brand their proposition as wishful thinking. But it seems to me that, to stand any chance of a headway with this issue, we must allow ourselves personal visits to the topic under discussion.

While the argument rages in our various `thought rooms’, class rooms or internet forum, we must ask ourselves, and be honest as we attempt an answer, can we manage our respective `dominions’ with unconditional love? If we cannot manage our micro environment through unconditional love, how can we market the idea to the macro environment?

Are you managing your household, loving unconditionally? Or rather more to the home front, are you managing yourself `loving all aspect of you unconditionally’? Do you feed your stomach and care less about applying cream to your hair before you leave your house? Do you rub cream to your face and legs, while ignoring your toe or ankle area? These are simple tests and there is a saying among Christians that he `who is faithful in little is faithful in much’.

Unconditional love should be an unequivocal spread of compassion and humane feeling across and around every member of the in-group, such that no one should at any time, feel left out or cheated out of an opportunity. Clearly, the manager has a tough job doing this. As it stands now, leaders already have enough difficulty `being fair’, which by itself, has been given a relative interpretation, conditioned by contingencies.

Strategic management thinkers know that contingencies and a leader’s response to them test his proficiency. It is on the basis of these tests that he can be assessed and qualified as either `good’, `bad` or `great’. These qualities, themselves, are often contestable. But if contingencies test a leader’s proficiency, unconditional love in leadership is his/her ultimate test.

Proponents of Unconditional Love in leadership, include my good friend Jane Barrash, Executive Director of the Continuum Center.

In a paper presented at the Institute of Leadership and Global Education in Canada earlier this month, Jane clamoured for a quantum shift, such that will bring a new paradigm of leadership and love. In her words …” Our Quantum leaders will be role models for the change that starts within and moves you to a deep connection with others…"

Jane concluded by saying that … “The Cartesian, mechanistic, rational paradigm has steered us into many walls of anxiety and overwhelm, isolation and incarceration. It's time for entering a new universe of possibility, where the inner world is a gold mind and self-discovery leads to a new sense of relationship to everyone and everything else. At a time that rates of employee dissatisfaction are high, and loyalty rates are low, the kinds of trainings and environments most needed and in demand by employees are those that promote positive internal emotional states and, because those internal states are linked to high performance, those are benefits leaders want as well.”

Jane must know, for other than this gradual change, which must start with self-examination, analysis and change, much of what are put out there in defence of UL are imaginary impracticalities.

However, as any student of policy and strategic studies know, contingencies often call for decisions that may not be fair or generally popular. Popularity is an evidence of fairness of decision makers.

In `Managing Compassionately’, Jeff Weiner, CEO of LinkedIn wrote that “compassion”, not unconditional love, “can be thought”. And in as much as a leader is encouraged to lead with compassion, he must be wise, for he advised that “Wisdom without compassion is ruthlessness, compassion without wisdom is folly”.

The `litmus test’ of the practicality of UL in leadership will include:

a)how to choose and maintain fairness between two competing extremes.

b)how to be fair when a leader is faced with a strategic decision, much of which won’t necessarily have to be made public.

c)Determining how to communicate bad news and still keep the face smiling.

d)How to show unconditional love to subordinates who challenge you.

e)Whether to accept that unconditional love in leadership must be conditional.

f)Deciding the borderline between UL and foolishness, especially when being taken for a ride.

The challenge may yet be huge and to teach unconditional love in leadership, even as development programs, we must articulate adequately.

<>-----------------------------<>

Benson Agoha is the founder of Woolwich Online.

<>-----------------------------<>

Articles for publication must have full contact details, including name, address and telephone number of sender and sent by email to: onlinewoolwich@yahoo.co.uk.

4-Ways to Make and Execute Life-Changing Decisions by Benson Agoha

Make no mistake about it, you will face challenges. Alright, you have heard it all before. And you probably did from the best brains around. But no one situation is the same and life-changing decisions don’t come easy. There are always costs and sacrifices to ponder whether you really want to go ahead. There are also always peculiarities of situations, and decisions, though an everyday part of our experience, are not by any means easy.



So how do we make decisions that are life-changing – and more importantly, ensure we implement it successfully? There are four ready issues to consider:



Self/Situational Analysis: Organise yourself and ensure you understand your peculiar situation. Understanding who you are, where you are and what you are capable of will enable you to start out, making the right moves. It will answer such questions as whether the time is right, just as whether you are even ready or not.



Lack of self-analysis can have serious and devastating consequences. Imagine a neophyte, with no climbing, terrain or weather experience setting out to climb Mount Everest, just to make a name for himself. Not only will he have the tough terrain to contend with, but chances are that he could pay seriously for his nonchalance. If he failed to consult with his physician, he would be taking his health for granted. If he refused to train in advance, he has already prepared his mentality to accept failure. And if he failed to take the relevant kits, then he would have prepared himself for suicide. David Walliams, inspite of his preparations, took ill several times during his last adventure to swim the River Thames. Claire Squires died running the 2012 London Marathon. But although hazards do not deter the brave, it is always advisable to be prepared before stepping out.



Self/situational analysis enables a sincere evaluation of an individual’s abilities and capabilities. It helps him come to terms with his own peculiar strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (swot). It enables him set the right and achievable targets and sets a solid base for other plans.



Situational analysis helps him identify problem areas and see whether he can do anything about them. Does he have the right skill, is this the right time, will the project require funding and has he got it? If not, does he have access to available sources of funds? He must ask himself questions and try to offer honest answers.



Information: It is often said that information is power, and nowhere is this more relevant that when venturing into unfamiliar territory. Gathering relevant information educates and equips you with necessary tools for making the next logical step once the result of your self-assessment is positive. Through information gathering, questions about characteristics, possible problems, contingencies and possible sources of help, if and when needed, can be answered. Information enhances knowledge and knowledge empowers. Knowledge creates confidence and even goodwill.



Action Plan: Set up a plan of action to implement your program. Action plans are sequential programs for carrying out your plan. Your organisational skills and ability to get your ducks on a row are tested here. Action plans usually act as a guide and helps you maintain implementation along a chosen track. Action plans provide a streamline for implementing decisions and tests your self-discipline. Can you focus, and ensure that what you have set out to achieve is what you continue to aspire to achieve, even in the face of seemingly insurmountable obstacles?



Focus: Focusing is perhaps, the toughest of the challenges and obstacles a decision maker will face. There will be temptations, and distractions will threaten to derail you. But will they? Should they? To make it, you must be alert at all times, as this is the only way you can spot distractions timely and take the necessary decisions to ignore them. Focusing may require you to be mean. And may earn you bad names, hatred and envy, but if you want it badly, you have to put up with it. Friends and peers may have contradictory and maybe parallel opinion that insists on you making a choice between your goal and them or theirs – which will it be? If you need it badly, you have to focus to maintain course.



Focus will test your willingness, readiness, determination, shock-absorber and even poise. Focus is an important test of character and it is success is unimaginable without it. Focus is the one characteristic that all great achievers who have made life-changing decisions at some point, have in common. So if you want it badly, be prepared to ruffle a few distracting feathers.



And yes, as you go along, always remember to re-evaluate. Reviewing grounds already covered will enable you to spot mistakes and areas deserving of correction.



I see success not very far ahead!

Why ‘Employers’ Don’t (Appear to) CARE

by Alan Adler

A couple of weeks ago I published a blog titled: “How to Get Employees to CARE.” I received several emails from readers who shared experiences and examples of ”employees” who cared, but ”employers” who didn’t. To all who sent emails, thank you for suggesting this topic.

So, now for a different twist: “Why Employers Don’t (Appear to) CARE.”

It doesn’t matter if it’s a direct report manager or the president of the company, all too often; it appears that employers don’t care.

Today I’d like to focus on a few reasons why employers might not care. NOTE: This may frustrate some, making it even harder to have a good attitude at work; however, it’s good to know what may be, behind the apathy. In virtually every instance where employers appear not to care, the root cause can be traced to their practice of outmoded, ineffective, inefficient and obsolete LEADERSHIP SKILLS. After all, hardly any business schools in the U.S require courses on this topic. This lack of knowledge causes fear of changing the culture — the civilization we work in.

The upshot of this behavior is a “culture by default.” Where, more often than not, fear and distrust permeate the workplace. People feel they’re walking on eggshells. Most employees feel discouraged and have a “we vs. them” attitude. Their performance slips and either they try to hang in because after all, “it is a job and money,” or they leave. While this is going on, customers sense the negativity and take their business elsewhere. Vendors, suppliers and other stakeholders are also impacted. And perhaps worst of all, the longer an employer continues to accept a culture by default, the longer the business suffers.

A few other symptoms include, employers who: *Are not models but rather exceptions to the values they encourage and thus destroy their own credibility. ◦Spend so much time working “in” their business that they have little time to work “on” their business. ◦Are too often driven by performance and profit, rather than creating value. ◦Tend to be so focused on ”bottom line” that they miss the big picture. ◦Are not strategic thinkers and therefore, justify their existence by micromanaging. ◦Don’t seem to appreciate the value of intellectual capital. ◦Are in denial that “they” be may be the reason their employees are “disengaged.” ◦Fail to recognize how much happy, productive employees, impact the business in a positive way.

Now, as much as I hate to admit it, there is little that can be done to get employers to care. There are heads of organizations that simply Just Don’t Care. They’ve made it to the top, are making big bucks (with the lifestyle that goes with it), and if someone quits, they can be replaced. They don’t effectively communicate or interact with their employees; they give orders and expect them to be carried out, and typically are not interested in changing their own behavior. These heads of organizations either don’t know how, or are not interested in creating value for the business.

Fortunately, culture can be changed when employers are ready and willing to make improvements. However, the process requires employers who know how to listen and willing to modify behavior. There are several chapters devoted to this topic in my new book UpStream — Are YOU ready to turn YOUR business around? I’m also a strong advocate of periodically bringing in, an outside expert. Someone with “fresh eyes” and “fresh ideas,” who can coach key managers to become practitioners of today’s effective leadership and management styles.

When there is an (intentional) strong positive culture — employers and employees CARE and COLLABORATE. The results are endless. Just like the title from the classic Dr. Seuss book: Oh, The Places You’ll Go!

They say that great leaders are great influencers. And while we know that many great leaders don’t in fact, “lead” anything, they still can be great influencers on others, to do the right thing.

Please leave a comment about organizations where employers and employees CARE. It would also be helpful if you could share an example of how they do that.

----------------<><><><>-----------------

Alan Adler, a Management Consultant, Business Coach and Author, wrote in from Charlotte, North Carolina.