It's Lonely at the Top

My early efforts at leadership

I started my work career as a secretary and ended it working in a leadership roll directly under the C.E.O. of a company that employed thousands of people.  I start with this bit of history, not as a "look at me brag", but to give creds to my experience making decisions at a high level.  Even at my own experience level, it was nothing compared with leading an entire city, state or country.  Some things do apply:

It isn't faith that eliminates fear, its faith that helps us travel through fear and be all we can be.

Being all we can be may not be the same as being all others expect us to be.  Being all we can be, personally, is the only criteria we will be judged when our days are done.

During a crisis is not the time to undermine your leaders.  They are already set in place and they need to concentrate on the solutions. It is counterproductive to make their job more difficult.

If you are under the leader, respectfully voicing your opinions and differing or supporting ideas is your duty.  Once the leader makes a decision, it is also your duty to support it even if it's not what you wanted.  Being able and willing to do this will be an indication of your maturity and your ability to see the big picture.

I guarantee you will never know all the factors that have gone into a decision a leader makes.  

Because you will never know those behind the scene factors, publicly second guessing your leader, during times of crisis, only makes you look weak and clueless.



A good many employees/citizens fail to notice their actions may be similar to those of little children:  

• Is your anger similar to a tantrum?  
• Is your logic based only on your own wants?  
• Are your deductive powers limited?  
• Do you bicker and undermine as negotiating tool?
• Are you happy only when you win?
• Do you fail to consider something bigger than you?    

When a leader must deal with childish behavior, they loose time working on real problems that need mature answers.

Is there a time to be angry?  Yes, in private.  To publicly display anger at your leaders, in front of people who need assurance, often undermines confidence and leads to instability.

When I see someone undermining leadership during a crisis, I immediately know their aim is to personally enhance their own self and know they are not acting in the interest of everyone.

There are bad leaders.   There are also good leaders who make bad mistakes.  You have a choice:  Quit or try to help them do better. One is easy - one is not.  

There will be a time, after a crisis, to write your opinion or your own history book.  Wait until then to analyze what went wrong, what you did and how it should have been done. 

  This also applies to those who must quit because they feel strongly they can no longer work for a leader.  If you quit and then publicly air your grievances during a crisis, it only looks like sour grapes; your comments will not carry weight.  Save it for your book.

What if you feel a leader will destroy a business, a community or a country?  In a democracy, you can leave and start a campaign to offer differing opinions.  What you need to know is if you aren't careful you can destroy the very things you're fighting for.  If the way you proceed is viewed as subversive or harming the greater good, your ideas will be dismissed by the majority.

When you attack a leader's personal habits (speech, dress, physical characteristics, family, etc) your position becomes weak.  It tells those listening you have nothing relevant to substantiate your dislike.

When a leader asks you to stop what you're doing or saying, it means they've heard you and they now need to make decisions based on many things, not just your needs.  The military calls it "standing down"; relaxing out of your readiness position and let others take the lead.  Taking offense or taking it personal at being asked to stand down shows a lack of understanding for the bigger cause.

Leaders can no longer discuss everything in detail with their employees, friends, family or with the public.  It undermines and causes unrest.  I'm not advocating subterfuge, eliminating teamwork or feudalism.  I'm saying a leader is put in that roll to make decisions.  At some point, after considering all input, that leader must make that decision alone.  Then that leader must move forward with the next decision process.

Leaders and those who work for them need to develop a sense of humor.  It can defuse tense situations and can help with tolerance.  Humor at work can not be sarcastic.  Sarcastic humor makes enemies and builds division.  

Know when to just shut up.  It's a quality that's lost its importance since the dawn of social media.  It's a quality needed today in both leadership and in those under the leaders.

Leaders have a personal life that is as important to them as your's.  They have family, friends, hobbies, a home, heartache, happiness and personal beliefs.  It's disrespectful to treat them as if they "belong" to you.  

The very old saying "it's lonely at the top" is still true today.  You should care that it's still true.  As I moved towards more leadership rolls, my close associates became fewer.  It's a natural process but it is a lonely process.  Having the personal support of people gives a leader strength.  It doesn't necessarily mean you agree but it means you care.  And that care may not even mean care for the leader but you care for the overall good.