Comments on: Marcus Buckingham http://www.connectioneconomy.com/2005/07/15/marcus-buckingham/ Blogging about Tomorrow's world Today Thu, 29 Jul 2010 18:50:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Mike http://www.connectioneconomy.com/2005/07/15/marcus-buckingham/comment-page-1/#comment-329 Mike Fri, 15 Jul 2005 13:14:27 +0000 http://www.tmtd.biz/2005/07/15/marcus-buckingham/#comment-329 It's interesting, on one hand, how much of this article rings true with Jim Collin's description of what he calls Level 5 Leadership in Good to Great. On the other hand, the section on Optimism and Ego almost contradicts some of Jim's findings. (This is not to say that Jim is the all-knowing, all-seeing god of management principles, it is simply an interesting comparison to make). Firstly, Jim and Marcus agree on the Checkers vs. Chess theory. Jim uses the metaphor of putting the RIGHT people in the RIGHT seats on the bus (bus being company, obviously). Jim also mentions that Level 5 leaders made sure their best (most talented) people worked on their most enterprising opportunties, not on the company's biggest problems. This sounds similar to Marcus' "maximising of individual talent" theory. On the other hand, Marcus lauds leaders who show unwavering, single-minded vision and blind optimism (my director always says leaders can't afford the luxury of a bad mood). Jim, however, found that Level 5 leaders were typically a paradoxical combination of humility and strong will. They were always able to confront the brutal facts of their situation and yet stay focused on what was best for their organisation. The danger in blind optimism lies in the potential to ignore the brutal facts of reality. It is interesting to compare the two different interpretations. It’s interesting, on one hand, how much of this article rings true with Jim Collin’s description of what he calls Level 5 Leadership in Good to Great. On the other hand, the section on Optimism and Ego almost contradicts some of Jim’s findings. (This is not to say that Jim is the all-knowing, all-seeing god of management principles, it is simply an interesting comparison to make).

Firstly, Jim and Marcus agree on the Checkers vs. Chess theory. Jim uses the metaphor of putting the RIGHT people in the RIGHT seats on the bus (bus being company, obviously). Jim also mentions that Level 5 leaders made sure their best (most talented) people worked on their most enterprising opportunties, not on the company’s biggest problems. This sounds similar to Marcus’ “maximising of individual talent” theory.

On the other hand, Marcus lauds leaders who show unwavering, single-minded vision and blind optimism (my director always says leaders can’t afford the luxury of a bad mood). Jim, however, found that Level 5 leaders were typically a paradoxical combination of humility and strong will. They were always able to confront the brutal facts of their situation and yet stay focused on what was best for their organisation. The danger in blind optimism lies in the potential to ignore the brutal facts of reality.

It is interesting to compare the two different interpretations.

]]>