There is wide difference between working hard and hard-working. The saying 'Jack of all trade, master of none' is a truism where and when Jack is all-in-all in a course of action.
In a disjointed system, it is extremely difficult to make positive impact. This is because such systems seldom have structures. People in paid employment are geared towards achieving set goals even when the work environment of not conducive.
Disjointed breeds dysfunctional...making easy, possible tasks look impossible.
Friday, December 26, 2014
Sow, Reap
The Law of Sowing and Reaping suggests that we'll all reap what we've sown, but it also suggests that we'll reap much more. Life is full of laws that both govern and explain behaviors, but this may well be the major law we need to understand: For every disciplined effort, there are multiple rewards. Discipline is synonymous with leadership.
Everything of value requires care, attention and discipline. Our thoughts require discipline. We must consistently determine our inner boundaries and our codes of conduct, or our thoughts will be confused. And if our thoughts are confused, we will become hopelessly lost in the maze of life. Confused thoughts produce confused results.
Everything in life has its price. Everything affects everything else. Neglect discipline, and there will be a price to pay.
If you're often inclined to toss your clothes onto the chair rather than hanging them in the closet, be careful. It could suggest a lack of discipline. And remember, a lack of discipline in the small areas of life can cost you heavily in the more important areas of life. You cannot clean up your company until you learn the discipline of cleaning your own garage. You cannot be impatient with your children and be patient with your distributors or your employees. You cannot inspire others to sell more when that goal is inconsistent with your own conduct.
Your life, my life, the life of each one of us is going to serve as either a warning or an example. A warning of the consequences of neglect, self-pity, lack of direction and ambition... or an example of talent put to use, of discipline self-imposed and of objectives clearly perceived and intensely pursued.
Everything of value requires care, attention and discipline. Our thoughts require discipline. We must consistently determine our inner boundaries and our codes of conduct, or our thoughts will be confused. And if our thoughts are confused, we will become hopelessly lost in the maze of life. Confused thoughts produce confused results.
Everything in life has its price. Everything affects everything else. Neglect discipline, and there will be a price to pay.
If you're often inclined to toss your clothes onto the chair rather than hanging them in the closet, be careful. It could suggest a lack of discipline. And remember, a lack of discipline in the small areas of life can cost you heavily in the more important areas of life. You cannot clean up your company until you learn the discipline of cleaning your own garage. You cannot be impatient with your children and be patient with your distributors or your employees. You cannot inspire others to sell more when that goal is inconsistent with your own conduct.
Your life, my life, the life of each one of us is going to serve as either a warning or an example. A warning of the consequences of neglect, self-pity, lack of direction and ambition... or an example of talent put to use, of discipline self-imposed and of objectives clearly perceived and intensely pursued.
Wednesday, December 3, 2014
The Youth
Youth is wasted on the young, or at least that’s what they say, but it would be a travesty if it were true. Youth is not only a time of life; it’s also a state of mind. Harvey Mackay, best-selling author and business speaker, says he stopped counting after his 39th birthday. He still considers himself young and he intends to stay that way.
You can have a youthful outlook and attitude at an old age, or an old-fogey attitude at a young age. The choice is yours.
Want to stay young at heart and mind? Here are Mackay’s ideas to help you:
1. Keep only cheerful, positive friends.
You can pick your friends, and I like to choose those who are positive and those who challenge me. They make me feel good. They don’t drag me down or make me angry at the world. Negative people see the difficulty in every opportunity, while positive people see the opportunity in every difficulty.
2. Keep learning.
I think Henry Ford put it best when he said, “Anyone who stops learning is old, whether at 20 or 80. Anyone who keeps learning stays young. The greatest thing in life is to keep your mind young.” I’ve always advised -never stop learning.
You can have a youthful outlook and attitude at an old age, or an old-fogey attitude at a young age. The choice is yours.
Want to stay young at heart and mind? Here are Mackay’s ideas to help you:
1. Keep only cheerful, positive friends.
You can pick your friends, and I like to choose those who are positive and those who challenge me. They make me feel good. They don’t drag me down or make me angry at the world. Negative people see the difficulty in every opportunity, while positive people see the opportunity in every difficulty.
2. Keep learning.
I think Henry Ford put it best when he said, “Anyone who stops learning is old, whether at 20 or 80. Anyone who keeps learning stays young. The greatest thing in life is to keep your mind young.” I’ve always advised -never stop learning.
Sunday, November 30, 2014
MIND...its potentials
The phrase "garbage in, garbage out" comes to mind when I think about the way some people live their lives. It is up to you to do the work of changing your beliefs, because when you do, you will be opening up new worlds - literally. The truth is that you have an amazing mind with a capacity for learning that is beyond your comprehension. You must believe this and feed your mind with valuable information. And when you do, you will be unlocking the potential of your mind. Here are three steps to help you find your genius:
1. Get the right knowledge. Words - if they are not true - are meaningless. I have heard people say, “I read it in a book.” But is it true? Just because someone says it or writes it, doesn't mean it is true. As learners, we want to get the right knowledge, not just information or opinions. It is our job to seek out information and knowledge and then test it and run it through our minds to see if it is true and if it can be rightfully applied to our lives in order to make them better. We need to weigh and measure what we learn in order to gain the right knowledge.
2. Become passionate about learning. This will take some work, but the only way to do it is to begin learning about things that have an immediate impact in your life. When you learn about a new financial concept that helps you earn money or get out of debt, you get fired up. When you learn about a way to communicate that helps you sell more products, you’ll feel energized. When you learn about how to interact with your family in a healthy way and your relationships get better, you’ll feel inspired.
3. Discipline yourself through the hard work of study. Learning will take work. Until someone comes up with modules that can plug into your mind and give you instant access to knowledge, you are on your own, and that takes work. The process of learning is a long one. Yes, we can speed it up, but it is still a process of reading, listening, reviewing, repetition, applying the knowledge, experiencing the outcomes, readjusting, etc. Simply put, it takes time. Slowly but surely, when you discipline yourself, you will gain knowledge and begin learning.
Learning is possible, no matter what your age. You are never too young or too old. Your mind was created to learn and has a huge capacity to do so.
1. Get the right knowledge. Words - if they are not true - are meaningless. I have heard people say, “I read it in a book.” But is it true? Just because someone says it or writes it, doesn't mean it is true. As learners, we want to get the right knowledge, not just information or opinions. It is our job to seek out information and knowledge and then test it and run it through our minds to see if it is true and if it can be rightfully applied to our lives in order to make them better. We need to weigh and measure what we learn in order to gain the right knowledge.
2. Become passionate about learning. This will take some work, but the only way to do it is to begin learning about things that have an immediate impact in your life. When you learn about a new financial concept that helps you earn money or get out of debt, you get fired up. When you learn about a way to communicate that helps you sell more products, you’ll feel energized. When you learn about how to interact with your family in a healthy way and your relationships get better, you’ll feel inspired.
3. Discipline yourself through the hard work of study. Learning will take work. Until someone comes up with modules that can plug into your mind and give you instant access to knowledge, you are on your own, and that takes work. The process of learning is a long one. Yes, we can speed it up, but it is still a process of reading, listening, reviewing, repetition, applying the knowledge, experiencing the outcomes, readjusting, etc. Simply put, it takes time. Slowly but surely, when you discipline yourself, you will gain knowledge and begin learning.
Learning is possible, no matter what your age. You are never too young or too old. Your mind was created to learn and has a huge capacity to do so.
Saturday, November 22, 2014
God's Service Par Excellence
When we choose to follow God, what we get doesn’t always match what we expected. No matter. Even if others ignore or forget you, whatever you’re doing for God is important to God. For that reason,” Elisha admonishes, “give your best wherever God puts you.”
I turn Elisha’s words over in my mind. It’s true that God’s ways are not our ways. What we want isn’t always what serves God best. Yet when we are willing to put ourselves in God’s hands and do what He asks, giving our best, God uses us. Even before I went further in the scriptures, I’m starting to understand some things about the way God works:
1. IF YOU GIVE YOUR BEST IN OBSCURITY, GOD WILL RECOGNIZE IT
2. IF YOU DO YOUR BEST IN THE SMALL THINGS, GOD WILL GIVE YOU BIGGER THINGS TO DO
In the ten years Elisha served Elijah, he was asked to do the lowliest of tasks. An officer of the king of Israel described Elisha as the one who used to pour water on the hands of Elijah. That was normally the job of a servant of low status. If Elisha did that, he undoubtedly performed other menial tasks during his decade of service.
If you are willing to do small things in the service of God, and do them with excellence, God will give you opportunities to do bigger things for Him when you are ready.
That's sincere lesson for leaders, real leaders.
I turn Elisha’s words over in my mind. It’s true that God’s ways are not our ways. What we want isn’t always what serves God best. Yet when we are willing to put ourselves in God’s hands and do what He asks, giving our best, God uses us. Even before I went further in the scriptures, I’m starting to understand some things about the way God works:
1. IF YOU GIVE YOUR BEST IN OBSCURITY, GOD WILL RECOGNIZE IT
2. IF YOU DO YOUR BEST IN THE SMALL THINGS, GOD WILL GIVE YOU BIGGER THINGS TO DO
In the ten years Elisha served Elijah, he was asked to do the lowliest of tasks. An officer of the king of Israel described Elisha as the one who used to pour water on the hands of Elijah. That was normally the job of a servant of low status. If Elisha did that, he undoubtedly performed other menial tasks during his decade of service.
If you are willing to do small things in the service of God, and do them with excellence, God will give you opportunities to do bigger things for Him when you are ready.
That's sincere lesson for leaders, real leaders.
Sunday, November 16, 2014
Success: No Short-Cut
I am extremely leery of any quick fix solution for success or riches. In my opinion, they don't exist. With that said, the following formula is one that I have recently shared with few people around me to encourage them to break through the rut they are in and experience success. I suggested that they begin to do the following two things on a regular basis:
1. Surround yourself with positive people who believe that this life is not all that there is. Personally, I find this at my church. I know we don't share the same faith in all cases. But this message is not about my faith. It is about you finding a group of people who regularly meet together and have a belief that there is more to life than what we see. This is the first step to a positive outlook on life.
2. You must educate yourself through reading. Based on findings, the average CEO in America reads four to five books per month. The average American reads one book per year, and 60 percent of us don't get past the first chapter! As leaders, let's replicate the American CEOs. If it works for them it can work for us. Make a promise to yourself to read at least one book per month. Develop a passion for reading and learning, and you will see your attitude and outlook on life begin to change.
Any person who faithfully invests their time in these two areas may not break world records in levels of success. However, everything in me believes that they would see dramatic improvements.
1. Surround yourself with positive people who believe that this life is not all that there is. Personally, I find this at my church. I know we don't share the same faith in all cases. But this message is not about my faith. It is about you finding a group of people who regularly meet together and have a belief that there is more to life than what we see. This is the first step to a positive outlook on life.
2. You must educate yourself through reading. Based on findings, the average CEO in America reads four to five books per month. The average American reads one book per year, and 60 percent of us don't get past the first chapter! As leaders, let's replicate the American CEOs. If it works for them it can work for us. Make a promise to yourself to read at least one book per month. Develop a passion for reading and learning, and you will see your attitude and outlook on life begin to change.
Any person who faithfully invests their time in these two areas may not break world records in levels of success. However, everything in me believes that they would see dramatic improvements.
Monday, September 29, 2014
Corruption, Conflict of Interests
Corruption - in both politics and business - is one of the premiere policy issues of the 21st Century. Issues of corruption are particularly salient in government contracting, where the interests of politics and business intersect. In recent years, a number of forces have intensified the focus on corruption as a worldwide issue. These include: the pace of globalization, commitments to democracy, varied and uneven infusion of development funds. One of the most important issues in the fight against corruption is the need to clearly define the conceptual elements that are generally agreed to comprise it. Central among these conceptual elements is the notion of conflict of interest.
Democracies and free markets absolutely rely on the integrity of their systems for the free flow of information and objective decision-making. Conflicts of interest act as a cancer that eats away at those institutions. Any society that cannot effectively address or prevent conflicts of interest will soon find its democracy and its free markets in states of collapse.
This paper attempts to refine the conflict of interest concept by looking at its various facets - contextual, historical, legal, perceptual and societal - and highlighting some of the challenges in its application to pragmatic, day-to-day activities. In addition to identifying and reviewing relevant issues, this paper provides concrete examples throughout the discussion. Although not intended as a scholarly article, I believe the arguments made here can be supported by the literature in this area.
A Definition of Conflicts of Interest
Although it might seem obvious, one has to have at least two interests to have a conflict of interest. In an often-used example, one might have an investment which conflicts with his/her job. But what does that really mean? How large a financial investment is enough? Often times, absent a legal definition, any investment is potentially conflicting with one's job. The question then comes down to some implicit notions surrounding employment; e.g. obligations of due diligence; the idea of bias of interests toward the job, etc.
Additionally, conflicts of interest are sometimes viewed by those in public administration as solely the province of government. But in fact, conflicts can occur in any setting. To draw on a current example, an accounting firm with a financial interest in the company or organization it is auditing will have difficulty giving a truly impartial and objective reckoning of the client's books. However, it is also true that public servants, especially in democracies, are generally held to higher standards than their private sector counterparts.
Admittedly, cultural considerations can affect how people perceive conflicts of interest. Where in some societies family obligations are paramount - it is not uncommon in the Middle East for individuals to take government jobs to benefit their families - in many others there are actually criminal restrictions on nepotism. However, the global push of modern economies are driving toward common views on the inappropriateness of bias for a family or a tribe, over a employment on behalf of some sort of public interest.
There are also certain conflicts of interest that are typically ignored or overlooked. For example, the salary one receives for a job actually entails a potential conflict of interest. If, as an employee, you make a decision that "enhances" your value to your organization - are you making the decision to benefit the organization or yourself? Although this seems a bit strange, this issue has worried philosophers for thousands of years.
Classical Ideals
Perhaps the earliest and most famous extended treatment of conflicts of interest can be found in Plato's Republic. In Plato's classic attempt to describe the "ideal" republic he creates several fictitious classes of citizens - which he describes in the myth of the metals. The average citizen was made of copper, a guardian - the bureaucratic equivalent of a citizen(1) - was to be of silver, and the Philosopher-King would be made of gold.
In his efforts to eliminate the potential of conflicts of interest in the Republic, Plato first argues that both men and women are capable of being guardians - both logically, and to eliminate any potential that men will act in a biased manor to protect women. Second, Plato argues that the guardians must be "lied to" and convinced that they are above the need to own private property. Instead they will live together in barracks provided by the city-state. Having men and women live together will produce children, and - again to eliminate conflict of interest - Plato has the children taken away from their parents and raised by the state. The education of the guardian class will be carefully regulated so that "they are gentle to their own people, and dangerous to enemies, not unlike well bred dogs."(2)
This idealized vision of a society illustrates the inherent dilemmas in trying to eliminate all conflicts of interest - political, economic, familial, etc. If we try to do so, we find that such conflicts are dynamic in nature and continue on indefinitely. For example, I had the opportunity to work with the Argentine government as they developed their ethics program. The first draft of the code detailed literally 101 different provisions, the first of which required employees to resign if they knew themselves to be incompetent. Such a requirement is on its face impossible to imagine, much less enforce.
Of course, there will never be public servants like Plato's guardians, willing to sacrifice all individual freedoms. On the other hand, without some controls conflicts multiple, making it difficult for decision-makers to remain objective and for observers to trust them. This is why modern societies struggle to regulate conflicts; and have such a difficult time in striking a reasonable balance.
Systemic Issues
The structure and dynamics of organizations can also affect the prevalence of conflicts of interest. For example, in Britain and France, there are relatively few civil service positions that change with governmental election cycles. By maintaining continuity among employees, these systems seek to emphasize the professionalism, dependability and independence of their civil service. In contrast, the U.S. has far greater potential for conflicts of interest. This is due both to the immense size of its politically appointed bureaucracy and to the relative frequency of its election cycles. Every presidential election results in literally tens of thousands of government positions turning over at the federal, state and local levels. Edmund Beard has argued that this is the Faustian bargain the U.S. has made in order to have greater democratic accountability.(3) The cost of maintaining oversight for conflicts of interest in such a large system would give many less wealthy nations pause.
We also need to recognize that each unique system may require a tailored approached. Several years ago I was in South Africa helping to draft financial disclosure legislation. My South African colleagues were as truly warm and amicable, but our work seemed to be stalling. Finally over dinner one night I asked them to level with me. "You don't understand," one explained. "I am the leader of my tribe. When a couple is married they will give me a chicken. When a baby is born I will get a goat. It is humiliating for me and disrespectful to them to keep track of and publicly list these gifts." The answer was simple, we decided not to include livestock on the financial disclosure form. For that society, there was no conflict of interest for receiving such nominal gifts.
The Legal Context
The most basic conflicts of interest are often times articulated in law. The act of bribery is usually considered illegal because it falls under a legal definition of "conflict of interest." In the U.S. - at the federal level - conflicts of interest statutes are categorized as subcategories or special cases of bribery. However, it could also be argued that bribery is simply a special case of conflicts of interest. Taking a bribe implies that one is accepting financial or other benefit in exchange for an official act. In such cases, bribes create incentives for civil servants to act in the interests of private parties rather than in the best interests of the government and the citizens it represents. Other subcategories of conflicts of interest include civil servants who: represent private parties (with or without compensation), receive pay from two different sources that conflict, or take actions upon leaving a position that could be perceived as exploiting their former positions.
Although some of these conflicts of interest subcategories carry greater burdens of proof than others, each attempts to describe a "bright line" of inappropriateness. And while it is also true that the applicability of each of these prohibitions may expand or contract with future judicial opinions, their central concepts remain constant.
Because democracies hold government officials to higher standards, it is often the case that conflicts of interest are subject to criminal proceedings and are supplemented through either civil remedies or administrative penalties. These conflicts generally deal with specific actions that are deemed inappropriate, e.g. gifts between employees or misuse of one's public position. In some countries this guidance can be incredibly detailed resembling a type of casuistry, an explanation of explanations, while in countries like Great Britain there is far greater reliance on general principles.(4) The irony is that although these rules purport to deal with discrete issues, the vast majority can be understood as belonging to the general class of conflict of interest.
Within the private sector there has also been a growth of conflict of interest concerns, expressed as company policy.(5) Although not having the weight of government administrative rules, or their complex interpretations, the private sector has had a great deal of success in disciplining employees for what some have considered "abstract" violations, such as sexual harassment, taking the company car on a cross-country personal road trip or expecting one's secretary to baby-sit.
Some of these developments are no doubt due to the lack of private-sector protections that are common within civil service rules. But a more positive interpretation is that private sector employees are typically expected to be able to interpret common sense application of corporate policies. Company codes in industries as varied as the pharmaceutical manufacturer, Merck & Company, Inc., the petroleum producing, Royal Dutch Shell, and the aerospace and defense giant, Lockheed Martin Corporation, have been very successful in articulating clear standards and enforcing them through a variety of disciplinary actions. These private sector disciplinary actions have generally been upheld in most courts in OECD countries.
Administrative Challenges
The ability to identify conflicts of interest does not necessarily insure that one can deal with them effectively. Actions to address conflicts of interest may entail ridding employees of the interest (divestiture), excusing the interest (waiver) or ensuring that individuals are not asked to make decisions that could be influenced by personal interests (recusal). Many of these actions require complex administrative systems to make them work effectively. However, in some cases particular courses of action may either be unworkable or may place an incredible burden on the individual or the organization.
For example, consider a situation in which the spouse of a government official works for a private firm that does business with the official's agency (a similar problem could exist for spouses who work for competing companies). If the official's agency issues a tender that the spouse's firm decides to bid on, a variety of real and/or perceived conflicts of interest may arise. These include access to insider information, possible undue influence on the decision makers who will award the contract and the like.
This scenario has become an increasingly common problem. One remedy might be to reassign either the agency official or the corporate employee to a non-volatile position, removed from the potential conflicts. However, if the individual's expertise is needed or the agency simply cannot afford to do this there may be no easy solution.
Similar problems exist for the actions of recusal and waiver. The interest may be so pervasive that recusing oneself prevents them from doing their job at all. Or the interest may be so deeply buried, for example owning stock in a holding company, that no obvious problem presents itself. In the case of waiver, the question revolves around what standards one uses and the independence of the individual making the decision. The corporate ethics or compliance officer can play this role more effectively than most government officers, because in the private sector revealing the conflict to an objective third party who can take action if they deem appropriate is generally viewed as "enough".
Transparency
While sometimes difficult to institutionalize, transparency is simply a commitment in theory and practice to openness in administrative and organizational processes. By exposing such processes, corruption becomes at once harder to hide and easier to detect. For example, if the bids are made public in a tender process, and the award goes to a company with one of the higher, rather than the lower bids, observers know to ask questions, and may find out for instance that a member of the selection committee had some interest in the winning company. Conversely, if the bids are public and the individuals on the selection committee and their interests are known the risk of discovery becomes much higher, encouraging individuals to base their decisions on the quality of the proposals. US Supreme Court Justice Brandeis put it succinctly, "Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman"(6)
This is the most basic level of transparency. And it is true that in some issues transparency is the only salutary action that can be taken. Most often transparency systems are used to prevent conflicts of interest beforehand, by identifying them and eliminating them as a problem. Even when no solution to a conflict exists, transparent practices can have a moderating impact.
As an example, when U.S. President Bill Clinton left office he had to declare all of the gifts he wanted to take with him on his financial disclosure form. In the U.S. the President and Vice President are exempt from the administrative limitations on gifts. You may have heard stories about the thousands of dollars worth of gifts the Clintons took with them as they left the White House in 2001. As the Director of the Office of Government Ethics recently explained "because the press had access to the financial disclosure forms, they could write articles about what they viewed as his excesses." The result was that the majority of the gifts were returned, including at least one gift President Clinton had brought into the White House with him!
But transparency, too, can be taken to an extreme. An American consultant trying to help foster transparency in Ukraine once suggested that financial disclosure forms should not only be completed by elected and appointed government officials, but also by their wives, their children, their parents and their siblings. With this much transparency no one could see where the real conflicts were. Everyone appeared conflicted beyond remedy.
Conflicts: No Harm, No Foul
There are few absolutes in life and conflict of interest is not among them. In fact, conflicts of interests are not always cause for concern. A sports analogy helps to make the point. Basketball is considered a "non-contact" sport. This means that intentional contact with other players is not allowed and may lead to a penalty. Yet, in actual play, it is sometimes surprising how much jostling and physical contact actually takes place. This is because the rules and logistics of the game make at least some contact unavoidable. Referees are therefore allowed to exercise judgment as to whether physical contact with another ballplayer conflicts or interferes with normal play. If the contact does not interfere with play, it is viewed as incidental rather than a cause for penalty. This rule of thumb is therefore, no harm, no foul.
In much the same way, there are many potential conflicts of interest that have no consequence and should not be considered corruption. For example, it is clear that private gain from public office seems, on its face, to be a fair definition of corruption. Yet as Jane Ley, of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, likes to remind me, when an employee accepts payment for doing their government job they are privately gaining from their public office. Suddenly, what was first perceived to be a profound evil, is actually benign in its purest form.
As Dennis Thompson has written: "What exactly the principle [against using private gain for public office] prohibits is not so clear, and its ambiguities are the source of many of the problems in implementing ethics in our time."(7) This problem extends to the very heart of the notion of conflict of interest. Andrew Stark in a complex analysis of this problem actually contends that
"pure private gain from public office… takes place in a realm beyond even the twilight zone of quid pro quo, where the official is neither capable of affecting the interests of the concerned nor beholden to them, and where the official's in-role judgment is thus in no way compromised." (8)
Therefore, issues that are general policy matters are not considered conflicting by Stark because they affect an entire class of people, e.g. tax increases. So a policy maker who would be affected by taxes would not be "conflicted" in providing expert testimony either for or against a tax increase. Another example in the United States is the part-time legislator at the state level who votes on a policy issue involving his profession. So a part-time legislator, who also is a practicing lawyer, would not be conflicted if she scuttled a bill in committee that would have limited legal fees in liability cases.
The Public as Referee: We (the People) think it is a foul
The dilemma with this approach is that the line between policy making and decision making can often blur. This can result in the actual movement of ethical standards to include behaviors that might have been considered proper before a catalytic event. Dennis Thompson argues that this is mediated corruption:
…. [M]ediated corruption differs from conventional corruption with respect to ….these three elements: (1) the gain that the politician receives is political, not personal and is not illegitimate in itself, as in conventional corruption; (2) how the public official provides the benefit is improper, not necessarily the benefit itself, or the fact that the particular citizen receives the benefit; (3) the connection between the gain and the benefit is improper because it damages the democratic process, not because the public official provides the benefit with a corrupt motive.(9)
Thompson uses the example of the Keating Five Case, which involved the apparent improper use of the influence of United States Senators to protect someone involved in the Savings and Loan scandals in the late 1980s. Another recent example might be of former President Bill Clinton's pardons at the end of his presidency. A further example - with apologies to my Canadian colleagues - would be the accusation against the Canadian Prime Minister for improper use of position affecting a golf course.
The major point in using these examples is not their potential illegality, but the public perception of the acts. Often in looking at conflicts of interest, and ethics issues more generally, we dwell on whether the act was legal or not. I believe that this is only part of the equation. Conflict of interest issues must not only focus on preventing criminal or administrative wrongdoing, but also on the impact of certain actions on the confidence of a people in their government. The most important product of government ethics programs is not putting people in jail, but maintaining the confidence of citizens in their government. Parenthetically, the main purpose of private sector ethics programs should be to maintain the confidence of stakeholders, stockholders and employees in the integrity of the corporation.
Appearance: The Litmus Test for Behavior
Implicit in many Codes of Conduct is the requirement to avoid conflicts of interest: for example, the Nolan Committee's Principles of Public Service and the rules promulgated by the civil service of Chile. In the United States, the Federal Executive Branch explicitly requires that civil servants avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest and actually promulgates a regulation by which employees can judge their behavior.
Appearance is a difficult standard. Former Senator Cranston (accused in the Keating Five Case) claimed that no matter what the perception was only he "knew what was in his heart." In fact, most democracies hold their public officials to much higher standards than the average citizen, what philosophers call supererogatory standards. Elected and appointed government officials are expected to serve the people, not only their supervisor or agency. In addition to the prohibition against private gain, they are expected to remain impartial in all decisions.
Recent research by the Ethics Resource Center suggests that corporate leaders are held to high standards by their own peers and subordinates. The study suggests that it is not enough for leaders to be good, moral individuals privately.(10) In order to be considered an ethical leader, one must be proactive about communicating their ethical values, decision-making criteria and expectations of employees. Managers must talk about ethics as much as they do about financial goals if they expect employees to make their numbers honestly.
(A study of the US Office of Government Ethics which is posted on their website www.usoge.gov suggests that government employees hold their superiors to the same high standards. In fact, the ERC's 2000 National Business Ethics Survey, which included employees from government, corporations and nonprofits, showed no difference in expectations or perceptions of ethics from one sector to another.(11))
Conclusion: Law, Values and Ethics
This essay is meant only as an exploration of the difficulties in defining conflicts of interest. Often conflicts of interest are viewed as purely legal in nature. In most cases, legal issues are merely the beginning of a discussion of conflicts. Discussions that stop with the law often become confused when applying law to specific situations. For this reason, it is often the issue of appearance that ultimately determines the content. Distinctions between conflicts of interest based on policy matters versus personal benefit evaporate when applied to specific cases.
I believe the reason for this is that we are uncomfortable examining the values that underpin conflicts of interest. Values seem to be so "soft" and non-specific that we avoid them. Yet to effectively understand the application of conflicts of interest to specific situations one must ultimately - implicitly or explicitly - discuss the values that are at the foundation of what we think is wrong with conflicts of interest. The three fundamental values in play are trust, integrity and fairness. Admittedly, these are not as concrete as most policy makers would like. But, they are at base the fundamental concepts that inform the instrumental value - e.g. avoiding conflicts of interest.
When constructing conflict of interest rules and laws to operationalize these values, most governments and organizations expect is individuals to behave as if no conflicts of interest are ever justified. What is not usually written into these rules is the recognition that some conflicts might be justified if higher principles are involved.(12) The key to the success of such a project is providing individuals with the tools to effectively weigh and evaluate the principles involved. Effective training on ethics and the use of these tools is critical in modern governments and corporations.
The recognition that problems of conflict of interest exist both in law and in a larger social context is critical to our discussion here. As former U.S. Chief Justice Earl Warren said:
"In civilized life law floats in a sea of ethics. Society would come to grief without ethics which is unenforceable in the courts and cannot be made part of law. If there were no sense of love and family, if there were no sense of loyalty, if friendship meant nothing, if we all, or any large potion of us, were motivated only by avarice and greed society would collapse almost as assuredly as though it lacked law.
"There is thus a law beyond the law, as binding on those of us who love our institutions as the law itself, although there is no human power to enforce it. In the law beyond the law, which calls upon each of us to be fair, each of us necessarily is his own Chief Justice. In fact, he is the whole Supreme Court from which there lies no appeal." (13) By Ethics Resource Center 2002
Stuart C. Gilman, Ph.D., with Joshua Joseph and Cheryl L. Raven
1. It is important to note that there was no meaningful distinction between the public and private sectors in ancient Greece. The Greek polis expected citizens to have both public and private roles. (See John Wild, Plato's Modern Enemies and the Theory of Natural Law. University of Chicago Press, 1953)
2. Plato, The Republic, Book II
3. Edmund Beard, "Conflict of Interest and Public Service" Public Affairs, 500.
4. For an example of the former, one can review the more than 1,000 informal advisory opinions from the U.S. Office of Government Ethics (www.usoge.gov ) and an example of the latter can be found in the Nolan Commission Principles in Great Britain.
5. For almost two decades the classic way of defining conflicts of interest was to distinguish between the economic and political spheres. This is not only overly simplistic but actually avoids the obvious problem of personal conflicts, and the possibility of conflicts of interest between private sector entities. For an example of this argument see: Andrew Kneier, "ethics in Government Service" in Ivan Hill (ed.) The Ethical Basis of Economic Freedom (1976).
6. Dauplanter vs. US (606 R. 2d 654, Nov. 19, 1979)
7. Dennis Thompson, Congressional Ethics: From Individual to Institutional Corruption, Washington, DC, Brookings, 1995, p.49.
8. Andrew Stark, "Beyond Quid Pro Quo: What is wrong with private gain from public office," American Political Science Review, March, 1997, Vol. 91, no. 1.
9. Dennis F. Thompson, "Mediated Corruption: The Case of the Keating Five," American Political Science Review, June, 1993, p. 369.
10. Linda Trevino, Moral Person, Moral Manager. ERC Fellows Program, 2000
11. Joshua Joseph, 2000 National Business Ethics Survey Volume I: How Employees Perceive Ethics at Work. Ethics Resource Center, Washington, D.C. 2000.
12. Such as an individual life or health. This is parallel to the notion used by Sissela Bok in her book Lying; Moral Choice In Public And Private Life, NY: Random House, 1978, pp. 243.
13. Earl Warren, Speech, 1962, New Haven, Connecticut.
Democracies and free markets absolutely rely on the integrity of their systems for the free flow of information and objective decision-making. Conflicts of interest act as a cancer that eats away at those institutions. Any society that cannot effectively address or prevent conflicts of interest will soon find its democracy and its free markets in states of collapse.
This paper attempts to refine the conflict of interest concept by looking at its various facets - contextual, historical, legal, perceptual and societal - and highlighting some of the challenges in its application to pragmatic, day-to-day activities. In addition to identifying and reviewing relevant issues, this paper provides concrete examples throughout the discussion. Although not intended as a scholarly article, I believe the arguments made here can be supported by the literature in this area.
A Definition of Conflicts of Interest
Although it might seem obvious, one has to have at least two interests to have a conflict of interest. In an often-used example, one might have an investment which conflicts with his/her job. But what does that really mean? How large a financial investment is enough? Often times, absent a legal definition, any investment is potentially conflicting with one's job. The question then comes down to some implicit notions surrounding employment; e.g. obligations of due diligence; the idea of bias of interests toward the job, etc.
Additionally, conflicts of interest are sometimes viewed by those in public administration as solely the province of government. But in fact, conflicts can occur in any setting. To draw on a current example, an accounting firm with a financial interest in the company or organization it is auditing will have difficulty giving a truly impartial and objective reckoning of the client's books. However, it is also true that public servants, especially in democracies, are generally held to higher standards than their private sector counterparts.
Admittedly, cultural considerations can affect how people perceive conflicts of interest. Where in some societies family obligations are paramount - it is not uncommon in the Middle East for individuals to take government jobs to benefit their families - in many others there are actually criminal restrictions on nepotism. However, the global push of modern economies are driving toward common views on the inappropriateness of bias for a family or a tribe, over a employment on behalf of some sort of public interest.
There are also certain conflicts of interest that are typically ignored or overlooked. For example, the salary one receives for a job actually entails a potential conflict of interest. If, as an employee, you make a decision that "enhances" your value to your organization - are you making the decision to benefit the organization or yourself? Although this seems a bit strange, this issue has worried philosophers for thousands of years.
Classical Ideals
Perhaps the earliest and most famous extended treatment of conflicts of interest can be found in Plato's Republic. In Plato's classic attempt to describe the "ideal" republic he creates several fictitious classes of citizens - which he describes in the myth of the metals. The average citizen was made of copper, a guardian - the bureaucratic equivalent of a citizen(1) - was to be of silver, and the Philosopher-King would be made of gold.
In his efforts to eliminate the potential of conflicts of interest in the Republic, Plato first argues that both men and women are capable of being guardians - both logically, and to eliminate any potential that men will act in a biased manor to protect women. Second, Plato argues that the guardians must be "lied to" and convinced that they are above the need to own private property. Instead they will live together in barracks provided by the city-state. Having men and women live together will produce children, and - again to eliminate conflict of interest - Plato has the children taken away from their parents and raised by the state. The education of the guardian class will be carefully regulated so that "they are gentle to their own people, and dangerous to enemies, not unlike well bred dogs."(2)
This idealized vision of a society illustrates the inherent dilemmas in trying to eliminate all conflicts of interest - political, economic, familial, etc. If we try to do so, we find that such conflicts are dynamic in nature and continue on indefinitely. For example, I had the opportunity to work with the Argentine government as they developed their ethics program. The first draft of the code detailed literally 101 different provisions, the first of which required employees to resign if they knew themselves to be incompetent. Such a requirement is on its face impossible to imagine, much less enforce.
Of course, there will never be public servants like Plato's guardians, willing to sacrifice all individual freedoms. On the other hand, without some controls conflicts multiple, making it difficult for decision-makers to remain objective and for observers to trust them. This is why modern societies struggle to regulate conflicts; and have such a difficult time in striking a reasonable balance.
Systemic Issues
The structure and dynamics of organizations can also affect the prevalence of conflicts of interest. For example, in Britain and France, there are relatively few civil service positions that change with governmental election cycles. By maintaining continuity among employees, these systems seek to emphasize the professionalism, dependability and independence of their civil service. In contrast, the U.S. has far greater potential for conflicts of interest. This is due both to the immense size of its politically appointed bureaucracy and to the relative frequency of its election cycles. Every presidential election results in literally tens of thousands of government positions turning over at the federal, state and local levels. Edmund Beard has argued that this is the Faustian bargain the U.S. has made in order to have greater democratic accountability.(3) The cost of maintaining oversight for conflicts of interest in such a large system would give many less wealthy nations pause.
We also need to recognize that each unique system may require a tailored approached. Several years ago I was in South Africa helping to draft financial disclosure legislation. My South African colleagues were as truly warm and amicable, but our work seemed to be stalling. Finally over dinner one night I asked them to level with me. "You don't understand," one explained. "I am the leader of my tribe. When a couple is married they will give me a chicken. When a baby is born I will get a goat. It is humiliating for me and disrespectful to them to keep track of and publicly list these gifts." The answer was simple, we decided not to include livestock on the financial disclosure form. For that society, there was no conflict of interest for receiving such nominal gifts.
The Legal Context
The most basic conflicts of interest are often times articulated in law. The act of bribery is usually considered illegal because it falls under a legal definition of "conflict of interest." In the U.S. - at the federal level - conflicts of interest statutes are categorized as subcategories or special cases of bribery. However, it could also be argued that bribery is simply a special case of conflicts of interest. Taking a bribe implies that one is accepting financial or other benefit in exchange for an official act. In such cases, bribes create incentives for civil servants to act in the interests of private parties rather than in the best interests of the government and the citizens it represents. Other subcategories of conflicts of interest include civil servants who: represent private parties (with or without compensation), receive pay from two different sources that conflict, or take actions upon leaving a position that could be perceived as exploiting their former positions.
Although some of these conflicts of interest subcategories carry greater burdens of proof than others, each attempts to describe a "bright line" of inappropriateness. And while it is also true that the applicability of each of these prohibitions may expand or contract with future judicial opinions, their central concepts remain constant.
Because democracies hold government officials to higher standards, it is often the case that conflicts of interest are subject to criminal proceedings and are supplemented through either civil remedies or administrative penalties. These conflicts generally deal with specific actions that are deemed inappropriate, e.g. gifts between employees or misuse of one's public position. In some countries this guidance can be incredibly detailed resembling a type of casuistry, an explanation of explanations, while in countries like Great Britain there is far greater reliance on general principles.(4) The irony is that although these rules purport to deal with discrete issues, the vast majority can be understood as belonging to the general class of conflict of interest.
Within the private sector there has also been a growth of conflict of interest concerns, expressed as company policy.(5) Although not having the weight of government administrative rules, or their complex interpretations, the private sector has had a great deal of success in disciplining employees for what some have considered "abstract" violations, such as sexual harassment, taking the company car on a cross-country personal road trip or expecting one's secretary to baby-sit.
Some of these developments are no doubt due to the lack of private-sector protections that are common within civil service rules. But a more positive interpretation is that private sector employees are typically expected to be able to interpret common sense application of corporate policies. Company codes in industries as varied as the pharmaceutical manufacturer, Merck & Company, Inc., the petroleum producing, Royal Dutch Shell, and the aerospace and defense giant, Lockheed Martin Corporation, have been very successful in articulating clear standards and enforcing them through a variety of disciplinary actions. These private sector disciplinary actions have generally been upheld in most courts in OECD countries.
Administrative Challenges
The ability to identify conflicts of interest does not necessarily insure that one can deal with them effectively. Actions to address conflicts of interest may entail ridding employees of the interest (divestiture), excusing the interest (waiver) or ensuring that individuals are not asked to make decisions that could be influenced by personal interests (recusal). Many of these actions require complex administrative systems to make them work effectively. However, in some cases particular courses of action may either be unworkable or may place an incredible burden on the individual or the organization.
For example, consider a situation in which the spouse of a government official works for a private firm that does business with the official's agency (a similar problem could exist for spouses who work for competing companies). If the official's agency issues a tender that the spouse's firm decides to bid on, a variety of real and/or perceived conflicts of interest may arise. These include access to insider information, possible undue influence on the decision makers who will award the contract and the like.
This scenario has become an increasingly common problem. One remedy might be to reassign either the agency official or the corporate employee to a non-volatile position, removed from the potential conflicts. However, if the individual's expertise is needed or the agency simply cannot afford to do this there may be no easy solution.
Similar problems exist for the actions of recusal and waiver. The interest may be so pervasive that recusing oneself prevents them from doing their job at all. Or the interest may be so deeply buried, for example owning stock in a holding company, that no obvious problem presents itself. In the case of waiver, the question revolves around what standards one uses and the independence of the individual making the decision. The corporate ethics or compliance officer can play this role more effectively than most government officers, because in the private sector revealing the conflict to an objective third party who can take action if they deem appropriate is generally viewed as "enough".
Transparency
While sometimes difficult to institutionalize, transparency is simply a commitment in theory and practice to openness in administrative and organizational processes. By exposing such processes, corruption becomes at once harder to hide and easier to detect. For example, if the bids are made public in a tender process, and the award goes to a company with one of the higher, rather than the lower bids, observers know to ask questions, and may find out for instance that a member of the selection committee had some interest in the winning company. Conversely, if the bids are public and the individuals on the selection committee and their interests are known the risk of discovery becomes much higher, encouraging individuals to base their decisions on the quality of the proposals. US Supreme Court Justice Brandeis put it succinctly, "Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman"(6)
This is the most basic level of transparency. And it is true that in some issues transparency is the only salutary action that can be taken. Most often transparency systems are used to prevent conflicts of interest beforehand, by identifying them and eliminating them as a problem. Even when no solution to a conflict exists, transparent practices can have a moderating impact.
As an example, when U.S. President Bill Clinton left office he had to declare all of the gifts he wanted to take with him on his financial disclosure form. In the U.S. the President and Vice President are exempt from the administrative limitations on gifts. You may have heard stories about the thousands of dollars worth of gifts the Clintons took with them as they left the White House in 2001. As the Director of the Office of Government Ethics recently explained "because the press had access to the financial disclosure forms, they could write articles about what they viewed as his excesses." The result was that the majority of the gifts were returned, including at least one gift President Clinton had brought into the White House with him!
But transparency, too, can be taken to an extreme. An American consultant trying to help foster transparency in Ukraine once suggested that financial disclosure forms should not only be completed by elected and appointed government officials, but also by their wives, their children, their parents and their siblings. With this much transparency no one could see where the real conflicts were. Everyone appeared conflicted beyond remedy.
Conflicts: No Harm, No Foul
There are few absolutes in life and conflict of interest is not among them. In fact, conflicts of interests are not always cause for concern. A sports analogy helps to make the point. Basketball is considered a "non-contact" sport. This means that intentional contact with other players is not allowed and may lead to a penalty. Yet, in actual play, it is sometimes surprising how much jostling and physical contact actually takes place. This is because the rules and logistics of the game make at least some contact unavoidable. Referees are therefore allowed to exercise judgment as to whether physical contact with another ballplayer conflicts or interferes with normal play. If the contact does not interfere with play, it is viewed as incidental rather than a cause for penalty. This rule of thumb is therefore, no harm, no foul.
In much the same way, there are many potential conflicts of interest that have no consequence and should not be considered corruption. For example, it is clear that private gain from public office seems, on its face, to be a fair definition of corruption. Yet as Jane Ley, of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, likes to remind me, when an employee accepts payment for doing their government job they are privately gaining from their public office. Suddenly, what was first perceived to be a profound evil, is actually benign in its purest form.
As Dennis Thompson has written: "What exactly the principle [against using private gain for public office] prohibits is not so clear, and its ambiguities are the source of many of the problems in implementing ethics in our time."(7) This problem extends to the very heart of the notion of conflict of interest. Andrew Stark in a complex analysis of this problem actually contends that
"pure private gain from public office… takes place in a realm beyond even the twilight zone of quid pro quo, where the official is neither capable of affecting the interests of the concerned nor beholden to them, and where the official's in-role judgment is thus in no way compromised." (8)
Therefore, issues that are general policy matters are not considered conflicting by Stark because they affect an entire class of people, e.g. tax increases. So a policy maker who would be affected by taxes would not be "conflicted" in providing expert testimony either for or against a tax increase. Another example in the United States is the part-time legislator at the state level who votes on a policy issue involving his profession. So a part-time legislator, who also is a practicing lawyer, would not be conflicted if she scuttled a bill in committee that would have limited legal fees in liability cases.
The Public as Referee: We (the People) think it is a foul
The dilemma with this approach is that the line between policy making and decision making can often blur. This can result in the actual movement of ethical standards to include behaviors that might have been considered proper before a catalytic event. Dennis Thompson argues that this is mediated corruption:
…. [M]ediated corruption differs from conventional corruption with respect to ….these three elements: (1) the gain that the politician receives is political, not personal and is not illegitimate in itself, as in conventional corruption; (2) how the public official provides the benefit is improper, not necessarily the benefit itself, or the fact that the particular citizen receives the benefit; (3) the connection between the gain and the benefit is improper because it damages the democratic process, not because the public official provides the benefit with a corrupt motive.(9)
Thompson uses the example of the Keating Five Case, which involved the apparent improper use of the influence of United States Senators to protect someone involved in the Savings and Loan scandals in the late 1980s. Another recent example might be of former President Bill Clinton's pardons at the end of his presidency. A further example - with apologies to my Canadian colleagues - would be the accusation against the Canadian Prime Minister for improper use of position affecting a golf course.
The major point in using these examples is not their potential illegality, but the public perception of the acts. Often in looking at conflicts of interest, and ethics issues more generally, we dwell on whether the act was legal or not. I believe that this is only part of the equation. Conflict of interest issues must not only focus on preventing criminal or administrative wrongdoing, but also on the impact of certain actions on the confidence of a people in their government. The most important product of government ethics programs is not putting people in jail, but maintaining the confidence of citizens in their government. Parenthetically, the main purpose of private sector ethics programs should be to maintain the confidence of stakeholders, stockholders and employees in the integrity of the corporation.
Appearance: The Litmus Test for Behavior
Implicit in many Codes of Conduct is the requirement to avoid conflicts of interest: for example, the Nolan Committee's Principles of Public Service and the rules promulgated by the civil service of Chile. In the United States, the Federal Executive Branch explicitly requires that civil servants avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest and actually promulgates a regulation by which employees can judge their behavior.
Appearance is a difficult standard. Former Senator Cranston (accused in the Keating Five Case) claimed that no matter what the perception was only he "knew what was in his heart." In fact, most democracies hold their public officials to much higher standards than the average citizen, what philosophers call supererogatory standards. Elected and appointed government officials are expected to serve the people, not only their supervisor or agency. In addition to the prohibition against private gain, they are expected to remain impartial in all decisions.
Recent research by the Ethics Resource Center suggests that corporate leaders are held to high standards by their own peers and subordinates. The study suggests that it is not enough for leaders to be good, moral individuals privately.(10) In order to be considered an ethical leader, one must be proactive about communicating their ethical values, decision-making criteria and expectations of employees. Managers must talk about ethics as much as they do about financial goals if they expect employees to make their numbers honestly.
(A study of the US Office of Government Ethics which is posted on their website www.usoge.gov suggests that government employees hold their superiors to the same high standards. In fact, the ERC's 2000 National Business Ethics Survey, which included employees from government, corporations and nonprofits, showed no difference in expectations or perceptions of ethics from one sector to another.(11))
Conclusion: Law, Values and Ethics
This essay is meant only as an exploration of the difficulties in defining conflicts of interest. Often conflicts of interest are viewed as purely legal in nature. In most cases, legal issues are merely the beginning of a discussion of conflicts. Discussions that stop with the law often become confused when applying law to specific situations. For this reason, it is often the issue of appearance that ultimately determines the content. Distinctions between conflicts of interest based on policy matters versus personal benefit evaporate when applied to specific cases.
I believe the reason for this is that we are uncomfortable examining the values that underpin conflicts of interest. Values seem to be so "soft" and non-specific that we avoid them. Yet to effectively understand the application of conflicts of interest to specific situations one must ultimately - implicitly or explicitly - discuss the values that are at the foundation of what we think is wrong with conflicts of interest. The three fundamental values in play are trust, integrity and fairness. Admittedly, these are not as concrete as most policy makers would like. But, they are at base the fundamental concepts that inform the instrumental value - e.g. avoiding conflicts of interest.
When constructing conflict of interest rules and laws to operationalize these values, most governments and organizations expect is individuals to behave as if no conflicts of interest are ever justified. What is not usually written into these rules is the recognition that some conflicts might be justified if higher principles are involved.(12) The key to the success of such a project is providing individuals with the tools to effectively weigh and evaluate the principles involved. Effective training on ethics and the use of these tools is critical in modern governments and corporations.
The recognition that problems of conflict of interest exist both in law and in a larger social context is critical to our discussion here. As former U.S. Chief Justice Earl Warren said:
"In civilized life law floats in a sea of ethics. Society would come to grief without ethics which is unenforceable in the courts and cannot be made part of law. If there were no sense of love and family, if there were no sense of loyalty, if friendship meant nothing, if we all, or any large potion of us, were motivated only by avarice and greed society would collapse almost as assuredly as though it lacked law.
"There is thus a law beyond the law, as binding on those of us who love our institutions as the law itself, although there is no human power to enforce it. In the law beyond the law, which calls upon each of us to be fair, each of us necessarily is his own Chief Justice. In fact, he is the whole Supreme Court from which there lies no appeal." (13) By Ethics Resource Center 2002
Stuart C. Gilman, Ph.D., with Joshua Joseph and Cheryl L. Raven
1. It is important to note that there was no meaningful distinction between the public and private sectors in ancient Greece. The Greek polis expected citizens to have both public and private roles. (See John Wild, Plato's Modern Enemies and the Theory of Natural Law. University of Chicago Press, 1953)
2. Plato, The Republic, Book II
3. Edmund Beard, "Conflict of Interest and Public Service" Public Affairs, 500.
4. For an example of the former, one can review the more than 1,000 informal advisory opinions from the U.S. Office of Government Ethics (www.usoge.gov ) and an example of the latter can be found in the Nolan Commission Principles in Great Britain.
5. For almost two decades the classic way of defining conflicts of interest was to distinguish between the economic and political spheres. This is not only overly simplistic but actually avoids the obvious problem of personal conflicts, and the possibility of conflicts of interest between private sector entities. For an example of this argument see: Andrew Kneier, "ethics in Government Service" in Ivan Hill (ed.) The Ethical Basis of Economic Freedom (1976).
6. Dauplanter vs. US (606 R. 2d 654, Nov. 19, 1979)
7. Dennis Thompson, Congressional Ethics: From Individual to Institutional Corruption, Washington, DC, Brookings, 1995, p.49.
8. Andrew Stark, "Beyond Quid Pro Quo: What is wrong with private gain from public office," American Political Science Review, March, 1997, Vol. 91, no. 1.
9. Dennis F. Thompson, "Mediated Corruption: The Case of the Keating Five," American Political Science Review, June, 1993, p. 369.
10. Linda Trevino, Moral Person, Moral Manager. ERC Fellows Program, 2000
11. Joshua Joseph, 2000 National Business Ethics Survey Volume I: How Employees Perceive Ethics at Work. Ethics Resource Center, Washington, D.C. 2000.
12. Such as an individual life or health. This is parallel to the notion used by Sissela Bok in her book Lying; Moral Choice In Public And Private Life, NY: Random House, 1978, pp. 243.
13. Earl Warren, Speech, 1962, New Haven, Connecticut.
Selflessness
Who is a great man? Someone who makes impact in the life of others. A philanthropist!
Truly great men and women are not acclaimed because of what they own and earn. Nor are they admired merely on account of their talents or level of professional performance. Rather, they’re respected because of their willingness to give themselves to people and purposes that will live beyond them.
Some people don’t even dare to dream. The unstated goal of their daily routine is simply to stay afloat. Everyone goes through seasons during which they fight just to keep their heads above water. However, people with a survival mentality continually tread water without ever going anywhere.
Others buy into the Nigerian dream. They are motivated by external rewards—a nice car, a spacious home, and a well-paying job. They prize security and a steadily increasing standard of living. Adopting a mentality of material success, they measure accomplishment primarily in terms of their net worth.
Still others have a mentality of self-actualization. They seek personal fulfillment over and above professional stability. They look to identify their talents and to sharpen their strengths, and they search for work that allows them to do what they love.
Obviously, everyone must meet a set of basic needs in order to survive. And, there’s certainly nothing wrong with working toward material security and self-actualization. However, if your dream doesn’t somehow transcend your self, then it will always be somewhat shallow and insignificant.
As Woodrow Wilson stated, “You are not here merely to make a living. You are here in order to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, with a finer spirit of hope and achievement. You are here to enrich the world, and you impoverish yourself if you forget the errand.”
The mysterious beauty of selfless service is that it returns benefits to those who charitably spend themselves on behalf of others. As 2015 beckons, watch out!
“One man gives freely, yet gains even more; another withholds unduly, but comes to poverty. A generous man will prosper; he who refreshes others will himself be refreshed.” - Proverbs 11:24, 25
Truly great men and women are not acclaimed because of what they own and earn. Nor are they admired merely on account of their talents or level of professional performance. Rather, they’re respected because of their willingness to give themselves to people and purposes that will live beyond them.
Some people don’t even dare to dream. The unstated goal of their daily routine is simply to stay afloat. Everyone goes through seasons during which they fight just to keep their heads above water. However, people with a survival mentality continually tread water without ever going anywhere.
Others buy into the Nigerian dream. They are motivated by external rewards—a nice car, a spacious home, and a well-paying job. They prize security and a steadily increasing standard of living. Adopting a mentality of material success, they measure accomplishment primarily in terms of their net worth.
Still others have a mentality of self-actualization. They seek personal fulfillment over and above professional stability. They look to identify their talents and to sharpen their strengths, and they search for work that allows them to do what they love.
Obviously, everyone must meet a set of basic needs in order to survive. And, there’s certainly nothing wrong with working toward material security and self-actualization. However, if your dream doesn’t somehow transcend your self, then it will always be somewhat shallow and insignificant.
As Woodrow Wilson stated, “You are not here merely to make a living. You are here in order to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, with a finer spirit of hope and achievement. You are here to enrich the world, and you impoverish yourself if you forget the errand.”
The mysterious beauty of selfless service is that it returns benefits to those who charitably spend themselves on behalf of others. As 2015 beckons, watch out!
“One man gives freely, yet gains even more; another withholds unduly, but comes to poverty. A generous man will prosper; he who refreshes others will himself be refreshed.” - Proverbs 11:24, 25
Sunday, September 28, 2014
Passion & Opportunity
Somebody said you have to love what you do, but that's not necessarily true. What is true is that you have to love the opportunity - the opportunity to build life, future, health, success and fortune. Knocking on someone's door may not be something you love to do, but you love the opportunity of what might be behind that door.
For example, a guy says, “I'm sewing clothes. Should I love sewing clothes?” The answer is, “No, you don't have to love sewing clothes, but if it is your first entry onto the ladder of success, you say, ‘I'm glad somebody gave me the opportunity to sew clothes. I'm going to do it so well, I won't be here long.’”
You don't have to love it, you just have to learn to appreciate opportunity and appreciate the person who brought you the good news, who found you. Appreciate the person who believed in you before you believed in yourself; appreciate the person who said, “Hey, if I can do it, you can do it.”
So, before you are tempted to give up or get discouraged, remember all success is based on long-term commitment, faith, discipline, attitude and a few other stepping stones along the way. You might not like the stone you are on right now, but it's sure to be one of the stones that leads to great opportunities in the future.
For example, a guy says, “I'm sewing clothes. Should I love sewing clothes?” The answer is, “No, you don't have to love sewing clothes, but if it is your first entry onto the ladder of success, you say, ‘I'm glad somebody gave me the opportunity to sew clothes. I'm going to do it so well, I won't be here long.’”
You don't have to love it, you just have to learn to appreciate opportunity and appreciate the person who brought you the good news, who found you. Appreciate the person who believed in you before you believed in yourself; appreciate the person who said, “Hey, if I can do it, you can do it.”
So, before you are tempted to give up or get discouraged, remember all success is based on long-term commitment, faith, discipline, attitude and a few other stepping stones along the way. You might not like the stone you are on right now, but it's sure to be one of the stones that leads to great opportunities in the future.
Saturday, August 30, 2014
IDEA-tion
In the early years of my NGO named Just Leadership Foundation (JLF), I attended an idea exchange led by very successful leaders at National Stadium, Surulere, Lagos, Nigeria. The genius of this event was that successful leaders shared their best practices with others who had the chance to ask questions. Young up-and-coming leaders also got to share their fresh ideas with more experienced leaders, who gave them feedback. The atmosphere of the conference was that of contagious hope and creative thinking because the entire experience was based on questions. It was a place where ideas were being reshaped into even better ideas.
I never forgot that experience, and later it was the catalyst for this weekly devotion, in which I share with leaders my ideas on salient issues of life. Believe me, it has been a worthwhile experience.
As a just leader, you must understand the value of questions. Desire the success of others. Add value to others’ thoughts. Don't be threatened by others’ strengths. Bring out the best thinking in the people around you.
I never forgot that experience, and later it was the catalyst for this weekly devotion, in which I share with leaders my ideas on salient issues of life. Believe me, it has been a worthwhile experience.
As a just leader, you must understand the value of questions. Desire the success of others. Add value to others’ thoughts. Don't be threatened by others’ strengths. Bring out the best thinking in the people around you.
Thursday, July 31, 2014
Loads to Manage
Our generation, the jet age has mandated us to have a proper understanding of what and how to manage. Think about it. We have time management, financial management, relational management, weight management, career management, and many, many more.The fact is though, that we don’t manage any of those things. What we do manage is ourselves, as they relate to those things. We don’t manage time. Time clicks by, second by second, whether we do anything or not. What we do is manage ourselves, and our activities, as the time passes. We make choices as to what we will do and be involved in. The problem as well as the solution lies not with time, but with us.
We don’t manage money. A pile of money will sit there forever if left alone. It won’t grow or shrink. What we manage is ourselves and the decisions we make in regard to how we will spend the money.
So as we live our lives and pursue success, one of the keys to grab on to is the idea that the most important thing we can manage isn’t a thing at all – it is our self!
Know your priorities and schedule your priorities into your schedule or budget or whatever structure governs that area of your life. Remember, one of the greatest gifts God gave us is the ability to choose. And we can choose to manage ourselves appropriately and according to our priorities. As we do, we will find ourselves feeling less and less of the personal pain and frustration that we feel when we are out of control.
Prioritize and lead well.
Monday, July 21, 2014
Decision At The Speed of Light
Several nations come to a standstill during the World Cup soccer tournament, as people pause from their daily routine to tune into the football action. Part of the excitement comes from the fact that games are often decided by a single goal. One well-timed kick can make all the difference.
With such a small margin separating victory and defeat, the decisions made by referees play a significant role in determining the outcome of a match. This is particularly true when two players collide within the penalty box, and officials must determine whether or not a foul has been committed. If so, a penalty shot is awarded and one team gains a golden opportunity to score a goal.
With tens of thousands of spectators in the stadium, and millions of fans watching on television, referees are under immense pressure to make the right call. Whatever decision they make will be subject to endless scrutiny and fierce criticism.
Like soccer refs, leaders eventually face situations that require making a tough call. Each tough call has the following in common:
- It demands a risk.
- It will be second-guessed and criticized.
- It is costly.
- If made correctly, a tough call will lead to a breakthrough that lifts your leadership to a higher level.
You’re not making smart decisions if you’re always giving the go-ahead or thumbs-up. By saying “yes” to everyone; you’re not being helpful and empowering. Instead, you’re irresponsibly robbing resources from what matters most.
With such a small margin separating victory and defeat, the decisions made by referees play a significant role in determining the outcome of a match. This is particularly true when two players collide within the penalty box, and officials must determine whether or not a foul has been committed. If so, a penalty shot is awarded and one team gains a golden opportunity to score a goal.
With tens of thousands of spectators in the stadium, and millions of fans watching on television, referees are under immense pressure to make the right call. Whatever decision they make will be subject to endless scrutiny and fierce criticism.
Like soccer refs, leaders eventually face situations that require making a tough call. Each tough call has the following in common:
- It demands a risk.
- It will be second-guessed and criticized.
- It is costly.
- If made correctly, a tough call will lead to a breakthrough that lifts your leadership to a higher level.
You’re not making smart decisions if you’re always giving the go-ahead or thumbs-up. By saying “yes” to everyone; you’re not being helpful and empowering. Instead, you’re irresponsibly robbing resources from what matters most.
Monday, June 30, 2014
Success is Everything
People often say that money isn't everything, and I think I know what they really meant. When we put this in the perspective of success, it is quite intriguing to affirm such belief. This is because money can either be numerator or denominator for success.
First, you need to succeed to survive. We must take the seasons and learn how to use them with the seed, the soil and the rain of opportunity to learn how to sustain ourselves and our family.
But then second is to then succeed to flourish in every part of your life. A good question to ask mature people is, “If you could do better, should you?” I think almost everybody would answer the question in the positive.
It is like Zig said: “Improving in every area of your life to see if you can't, with satisfaction, at the end of the day, week, month and year say, ‘I have made excellent progress this year for myself, for my family, for my business, my career and my health.’” I think that kind of success is something everybody recognizes as legitimate and something we should all strive for.
As we progress into the second phase of 2014, the onus is on us to wake up to the task ahead and redirect our strength towards success and success only.
First, you need to succeed to survive. We must take the seasons and learn how to use them with the seed, the soil and the rain of opportunity to learn how to sustain ourselves and our family.
But then second is to then succeed to flourish in every part of your life. A good question to ask mature people is, “If you could do better, should you?” I think almost everybody would answer the question in the positive.
It is like Zig said: “Improving in every area of your life to see if you can't, with satisfaction, at the end of the day, week, month and year say, ‘I have made excellent progress this year for myself, for my family, for my business, my career and my health.’” I think that kind of success is something everybody recognizes as legitimate and something we should all strive for.
As we progress into the second phase of 2014, the onus is on us to wake up to the task ahead and redirect our strength towards success and success only.
Life Choices
Each of us has two distinct choices to make about what we will do with our lives.
The first choice we can make is to be less than we have the capacity to be. To earn less. To have less. To read less and think less. To try less and discipline ourselves less. These are the choices that lead to an empty life. These are the choices that, once made, lead to a life of constant apprehension instead of a life of wondrous anticipation.
And the second choice? To do it all! To become all that we can possibly be. To read every book that we possibly can. To earn as much as we possibly can. To give and share as much as we possibly can. To strive and produce and accomplish as much as we possibly can. All of us have the choice.
To do or not to do. To be or not to be. To be all or to be less or to be nothing at all.
Our ultimate life objective should be to create as much as our talent and ability and desire will permit. To settle for doing less than we could do is to fail in this worthiest of undertakings. The greatest rewards are always reserved for those who bring great value to themselves and the world around them as a result of whom and what they have become.
The first choice we can make is to be less than we have the capacity to be. To earn less. To have less. To read less and think less. To try less and discipline ourselves less. These are the choices that lead to an empty life. These are the choices that, once made, lead to a life of constant apprehension instead of a life of wondrous anticipation.
And the second choice? To do it all! To become all that we can possibly be. To read every book that we possibly can. To earn as much as we possibly can. To give and share as much as we possibly can. To strive and produce and accomplish as much as we possibly can. All of us have the choice.
To do or not to do. To be or not to be. To be all or to be less or to be nothing at all.
Our ultimate life objective should be to create as much as our talent and ability and desire will permit. To settle for doing less than we could do is to fail in this worthiest of undertakings. The greatest rewards are always reserved for those who bring great value to themselves and the world around them as a result of whom and what they have become.
Impact on Others
Early in our careers, we tend to be concerned with success, personal development and self-advancement. We think about what others can do for us. We spend the bulk of our time trying to get other people interested in our ideas and abilities. To this end, we trumpet our accomplishments and show off our knowledge. In short, they try to win others over by being impressive...(all because they were (are) leaders in the making).
As I mature into the art of leadership, I have began to understand that we will only go farther by focusing first on the advancement of others. Instead of trying to impress others, we should search for ways to show how we are impressed by others.
One of the best ways to demonstrate that you are looking out for the interests of your colleagues, teammates and subordinates is to do something for them that they cannot do for themselves.
As I mature into the art of leadership, I have began to understand that we will only go farther by focusing first on the advancement of others. Instead of trying to impress others, we should search for ways to show how we are impressed by others.
One of the best ways to demonstrate that you are looking out for the interests of your colleagues, teammates and subordinates is to do something for them that they cannot do for themselves.
Friday, May 30, 2014
Ratio - 20:60:20
I believe you've heard and read about pareto 80:20 principle. Today, there are variants of the principle such as 70:20:10 and mine: 20:60:20.
There are the top 20%, they are the great performers. You have the bottom 20%, these people are looking for a free ride. Then, you have the middle 60%.
Here is what the problem, leaders and managers spend their time trying to motivate, inspire and correct the problems of the bottom 20%. They drain all their energy and income trying to make them better, they are not going to get better, they don’t want to get better. You may need to be let go of these people...
The top 20%, stay out of their way! These people are the best! They will do their job because that is the kind of people they are. If you didn’t show up, they would still do their job. If you weren’t there and didn’t tell them what to do, they would figure out what to do.
The middle 60%, that is the job of a real leader in my opinion. Here is what you have to understand about the 60%, the minute you dump your bottom 20% you will have a good portion of the 60% who cannot wait to drop down into that category. That’s right. They are just looking for room. You will create a vacuum and they will immediately go down there. Now, understand this about the top 20%, they are going to leave you eventually. They are always looking for bigger and better opportunities, they will leave and there is nothing you can do about it. But, a portion of the middle 60% can’t wait for the people at the top to leave and make room for them---they are ready to step up. Your job as a leader is to set that vision, challenge, scare, motivate and inspire them with the strength of your conviction.
Leaders have to understand the middle 60%, they can go either way and it’s the leaders job to constantly give them the opportunity to go either way, out the door or up the ladder.
There are the top 20%, they are the great performers. You have the bottom 20%, these people are looking for a free ride. Then, you have the middle 60%.
Here is what the problem, leaders and managers spend their time trying to motivate, inspire and correct the problems of the bottom 20%. They drain all their energy and income trying to make them better, they are not going to get better, they don’t want to get better. You may need to be let go of these people...
The top 20%, stay out of their way! These people are the best! They will do their job because that is the kind of people they are. If you didn’t show up, they would still do their job. If you weren’t there and didn’t tell them what to do, they would figure out what to do.
The middle 60%, that is the job of a real leader in my opinion. Here is what you have to understand about the 60%, the minute you dump your bottom 20% you will have a good portion of the 60% who cannot wait to drop down into that category. That’s right. They are just looking for room. You will create a vacuum and they will immediately go down there. Now, understand this about the top 20%, they are going to leave you eventually. They are always looking for bigger and better opportunities, they will leave and there is nothing you can do about it. But, a portion of the middle 60% can’t wait for the people at the top to leave and make room for them---they are ready to step up. Your job as a leader is to set that vision, challenge, scare, motivate and inspire them with the strength of your conviction.
Leaders have to understand the middle 60%, they can go either way and it’s the leaders job to constantly give them the opportunity to go either way, out the door or up the ladder.
Wednesday, April 30, 2014
Gaps of Life
There is a simple principle of personal development which is in consonance with momentum. There’s a gap between where we stand, and where we’re trying to go. To be successful on our journey of life, we have to be aware of this space and prudent when crossing it. We have to mind the gaps of growth. Some of the gaps we experience in life are:
The Assumption Gap: Assuming Growth Is Automatic. Growth doesn’t just happen. Most people expect to grow naturally, as if by osmosis they can somehow magically absorb the lessons of life.
The Knowledge Gap: Not Knowing How to Grow. The average person spends more time planning their vacation than their personal growth. They want others to invest in them, but they’re unwilling to put their own time, money, and reputation on the line in order to better their lives.
The Timing Gap: Sensing the Time Isn’t Right to Begin. Lots of people embrace a philosophy that’s pro-life and procrastination. They want to live it up today so they delay doing anything requiring diligent effort and hard work. However, the longer you wait to do something you should do now the greater the odds that you will never do it.
The Mistake Gap: Fearing Failure. Whenever we dare to try anything great, we’re going to fail somewhere along the way. You’re guaranteed to mess up from time to time as a leader. Avoiding mistakes doesn’t bring success; it keeps you trapped at your current level of growth.
The Inspiration Gap: Feeling Unmotivated. Winners do what is right and then feel good as a result. Whiners want to feel good before they do what is right. Life involves an inescapable amount of pain, but it’s far better to endure the pain of discipline today than to suffer the pain of regret later.
The Assumption Gap: Assuming Growth Is Automatic. Growth doesn’t just happen. Most people expect to grow naturally, as if by osmosis they can somehow magically absorb the lessons of life.
The Knowledge Gap: Not Knowing How to Grow. The average person spends more time planning their vacation than their personal growth. They want others to invest in them, but they’re unwilling to put their own time, money, and reputation on the line in order to better their lives.
The Timing Gap: Sensing the Time Isn’t Right to Begin. Lots of people embrace a philosophy that’s pro-life and procrastination. They want to live it up today so they delay doing anything requiring diligent effort and hard work. However, the longer you wait to do something you should do now the greater the odds that you will never do it.
The Mistake Gap: Fearing Failure. Whenever we dare to try anything great, we’re going to fail somewhere along the way. You’re guaranteed to mess up from time to time as a leader. Avoiding mistakes doesn’t bring success; it keeps you trapped at your current level of growth.
The Inspiration Gap: Feeling Unmotivated. Winners do what is right and then feel good as a result. Whiners want to feel good before they do what is right. Life involves an inescapable amount of pain, but it’s far better to endure the pain of discipline today than to suffer the pain of regret later.
Saturday, April 26, 2014
Redefining Success
Real life situations around me prompted me to make one of my key life decisions: rewriting my definition of success. Instead of acclaim or advancement or achievement, I decided that for me success means having those closest to me love and respect me the most.
If you want to redefine success the way I did, here are some ways to put your decision into practice:
Determine your priorities.
How much of your calendar is devoted to your family and/or close friends? On your budget and to-do list, where do you write in your loved ones? No relationship can survive for long on leftovers.
Decide on your philosophy.
Once your loved ones are a priority, you have to decide together what you want your family to stand for. What values will you live out? For us, the bottom line was to cultivate and maintain:
- Determination to serve God,
- Commitment to God's will
- Diligence in all endeavour
- Continual growth,
- Discipline and
- Contributions to life and lives.
Develop your problem-solving strategy.
In all facets of life, the best plan is to expect problems, stay committed, and develop a strategy for getting through the rough times. Better understanding, Positive change, and Growing relationships are strategies in my opinion.
If you want to redefine success the way I did, here are some ways to put your decision into practice:
Determine your priorities.
How much of your calendar is devoted to your family and/or close friends? On your budget and to-do list, where do you write in your loved ones? No relationship can survive for long on leftovers.
Decide on your philosophy.
Once your loved ones are a priority, you have to decide together what you want your family to stand for. What values will you live out? For us, the bottom line was to cultivate and maintain:
- Determination to serve God,
- Commitment to God's will
- Diligence in all endeavour
- Continual growth,
- Discipline and
- Contributions to life and lives.
Develop your problem-solving strategy.
In all facets of life, the best plan is to expect problems, stay committed, and develop a strategy for getting through the rough times. Better understanding, Positive change, and Growing relationships are strategies in my opinion.
Monday, March 24, 2014
...Judge Not Yet
It is easy and handy for us to judge a book by its cover. For reason as small as our unwillingness to read.
We should never judge by appearance. How would your life be different if…you stopped making negative judgmental assumptions about people you encounter? Let today be the day…you look for the good in everyone you meet and respect their journey.
Then you are a just LEADER!
We should never judge by appearance. How would your life be different if…you stopped making negative judgmental assumptions about people you encounter? Let today be the day…you look for the good in everyone you meet and respect their journey.
Then you are a just LEADER!
Aside MONEY
It is a general norm that money is the bedrock of any business. When starting any enterprise or business, we all know the value of having plenty of capital (money). But I bet we both know or at least have heard of people who started with no capital who went on to make fortunes. How? you may ask. I believe there are actually some things that are more valuable than capital that can lead to your entrepreneurial success. Let's concisely consider some of them:
1. Time: The time you set aside not to be wasted, not to be given away. Time you set aside to be invested in an enterprise that brings value to the marketplace with the hope of making a profit. Now we have capital time. How valuable is time? Time properly invested is worth a fortune. Time wasted can be devastation. Time invested can perform miracles, so you invest your time.
2. Determination: Determination says I will. I will find someone to buy into my idea before today is over. If it works once, it will work again.
3. Courage: If you've only got $1 and a lot of courage, I'm telling you, you've got a good future ahead of you. Humans can do the most incredible things no matter what happens. Haven't we heard the stories? It's humans. You can't sell humans short.
4. Ambition: “Wow! If I can sell three, I can sell 33. If I can sell 33, I can sell 103.” You can be dazzled by your own dreams of the future.
5. Faith: And you have to believe your service your product. And she then starts to believe in herself. Let your self-esteem starts to soar. These are investments that are unmatched.
Financial independence is sine qua non to good leadership. Be wise.
1. Time: The time you set aside not to be wasted, not to be given away. Time you set aside to be invested in an enterprise that brings value to the marketplace with the hope of making a profit. Now we have capital time. How valuable is time? Time properly invested is worth a fortune. Time wasted can be devastation. Time invested can perform miracles, so you invest your time.
2. Determination: Determination says I will. I will find someone to buy into my idea before today is over. If it works once, it will work again.
3. Courage: If you've only got $1 and a lot of courage, I'm telling you, you've got a good future ahead of you. Humans can do the most incredible things no matter what happens. Haven't we heard the stories? It's humans. You can't sell humans short.
4. Ambition: “Wow! If I can sell three, I can sell 33. If I can sell 33, I can sell 103.” You can be dazzled by your own dreams of the future.
5. Faith: And you have to believe your service your product. And she then starts to believe in herself. Let your self-esteem starts to soar. These are investments that are unmatched.
Financial independence is sine qua non to good leadership. Be wise.
Friday, February 28, 2014
Inspired IDEAS
Ideas plus Inspiration; that's the mixture that really turns things on, sends an entrepreneur program into high gear. We need ideas for the goals and plans and we need inspiration for the emotional vitality. To put it to work, to make it flow, to make it multiply.
However, the greatest step toward success is self-confidence. The greatest builder of self-confidence is self-esteem, and self-esteem comes from doing the daily things you know you should do.
Sometimes your self-esteem will start to soar when you make some critical decisions. Decisions to walk a new road, to start a new direction, to start a new discipline, to knock new doors.
Turn on your wheel of success, in 2014.
However, the greatest step toward success is self-confidence. The greatest builder of self-confidence is self-esteem, and self-esteem comes from doing the daily things you know you should do.
Sometimes your self-esteem will start to soar when you make some critical decisions. Decisions to walk a new road, to start a new direction, to start a new discipline, to knock new doors.
Turn on your wheel of success, in 2014.
Opportunity & Preparation
John Wooden a basketball coach once said, "When opportunity comes, it’s too late to prepare." In other words, we should prepare ahead of opportunities. Likewise, we need to be prepared with the necessary skills and abilities to meet opportunities.
Here’s what preparation is not: Knowing all the answers before you start. The key is to recognize when you know enough to start down a road. Otherwise, you’ll be plagued with the paralysis of analysis.
Ask yourself what will happen to your options in the meantime. Will some be eliminated as time passes (for example, if someone else’s decision will impact it)? If waiting will eliminate an important option, decide and act now.
Here’s what preparation is not: Knowing all the answers before you start. The key is to recognize when you know enough to start down a road. Otherwise, you’ll be plagued with the paralysis of analysis.
Ask yourself what will happen to your options in the meantime. Will some be eliminated as time passes (for example, if someone else’s decision will impact it)? If waiting will eliminate an important option, decide and act now.
Friday, January 31, 2014
Leading and Listening
Developing stronger leadership skills is an important act for virtually everyone in business. But becoming a better leader doesn't always require attending a pricey seminar. Sometimes, simple acts can have an immediate impact.
Being a good listener is a needful but rare quality in leaders. Every day, spend good time with someone who has something to say about a challenge or opportunity your business or society is facing. It might be an employee, relation or a friend. Leaders often talk too much and don't truly listen to the people around them, who often have valuable insights. But good ones do! As a JUST leader, listen to other people with the same level of attention and open mind as you would listen to a consultant or outside expert. You don't always have to follow the advice, but this exercise can help you get out of the same-old patterns of thinking.
Less wonder, God made our ears two.
Being a good listener is a needful but rare quality in leaders. Every day, spend good time with someone who has something to say about a challenge or opportunity your business or society is facing. It might be an employee, relation or a friend. Leaders often talk too much and don't truly listen to the people around them, who often have valuable insights. But good ones do! As a JUST leader, listen to other people with the same level of attention and open mind as you would listen to a consultant or outside expert. You don't always have to follow the advice, but this exercise can help you get out of the same-old patterns of thinking.
Less wonder, God made our ears two.
Sunday, January 26, 2014
Two Sides of PRIDE
When you think of the word pride, does it strike you as positive or negative? There are certainly many positive types of pride. It’s good to “take pride in our work.” We like it when someone tells us, “I’m proud of you.” And nearly everyone wants to live in a neighborhood where people display “pride of ownership.” All of these expressions communicate a positive kind of pride: dignity, respect and honor, traits that we all can embrace.
But pride is not always positive. Pride can also mean conceit, arrogance, or superiority. This kind of pride is based on self-centeredness, and it’s destructive. Selfish pride is especially destructive to relationships. That’s because the opposite of loving others is not hating them but rather being self-centered.
Pride gets no pleasure out of having something, only out of having more of it than the next man. We say that people are proud of being richer, or cleverer, or better looking than others. If every one else became equally rich, or clever, or good looking, there would be nothing to be proud about. It is the comparison that makes you proud: the pleasure of being above the rest.
So how do we solve the problem of pride? I believe there are several steps we can take to counteract our tendency toward self-centeredness.
1. Recognize and Admit Your Pride. The first step is to realize that one is proud.
2. Express Your Gratitude. Henry Ward Beecher said, “A proud man is seldom a grateful man, for he never thinks he gets as much as he deserves.”
3. Practice Servanthood. A person who is truly great is always willing to be little. Serving others requires us to focus on their needs rather than our own.
4. Laugh at Yourself. There’s an old saying, “Blessed are they that laugh at themselves, for they shall never cease to be entertained.” Once you begin to look for humor in your behavior and situation, you find it everywhere.
If your pride pushes you toward performing with excellence, doing your best, and finding joy in the accomplishments of others, it’s probably helping you become a better leader.
But pride is not always positive. Pride can also mean conceit, arrogance, or superiority. This kind of pride is based on self-centeredness, and it’s destructive. Selfish pride is especially destructive to relationships. That’s because the opposite of loving others is not hating them but rather being self-centered.
Pride gets no pleasure out of having something, only out of having more of it than the next man. We say that people are proud of being richer, or cleverer, or better looking than others. If every one else became equally rich, or clever, or good looking, there would be nothing to be proud about. It is the comparison that makes you proud: the pleasure of being above the rest.
So how do we solve the problem of pride? I believe there are several steps we can take to counteract our tendency toward self-centeredness.
1. Recognize and Admit Your Pride. The first step is to realize that one is proud.
2. Express Your Gratitude. Henry Ward Beecher said, “A proud man is seldom a grateful man, for he never thinks he gets as much as he deserves.”
3. Practice Servanthood. A person who is truly great is always willing to be little. Serving others requires us to focus on their needs rather than our own.
4. Laugh at Yourself. There’s an old saying, “Blessed are they that laugh at themselves, for they shall never cease to be entertained.” Once you begin to look for humor in your behavior and situation, you find it everywhere.
If your pride pushes you toward performing with excellence, doing your best, and finding joy in the accomplishments of others, it’s probably helping you become a better leader.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
The International Finance Corporation, IFC, a member of the World Bank Group, has estimated that in Africa, small and medium enterprises,... -
The Group Managing Director of Agile Communications, Rufai Ladipo, has said that healthy and competitive Small and Medium Enterprises, SM... -
When you decide to venture into the sojourn of self-employment, starting a business with partner(s) offers many benefits, not the least of...