Comments on: Slow Leadership

By: mojotek

mojotek — Fri, 30 Dec 2005 13:52:22 +0000

Very interesting post. Seems government leaders all around the world need to follow that type of advice.

By: RodeoClown

RodeoClown — Tue, 20 Dec 2005 21:16:23 +0000

Hi Carmine,
thanks for your comment. Giving things the proper time is something I try really hard to do – some things really do need to be rushed (the car in front of me just jumped on the brakes… better respond quickly – although if I hadn’t been rushing the driving, maybe I wouldn’t need to react so quickly… hmmm), but most of the time rushing into something ends up with someone hurting.

I know, because I’ve rushed into plenty of things and found myself hurt by doing so.

Enjoy your break, I look forward to seeing what new insights you will bring us next year.

By: Carmine Coyote

Carmine Coyote — Tue, 20 Dec 2005 14:58:06 +0000

Thanks for picking up on the Slow Leadership idea. It’s not about being slow, per se; it’s about giving things the correct amount of time — the time they deserve.

Rushing decisions through on the basis there is no time for anything else is an old trick to justify possible abuses of power, whether in government or industry. Allowing discussion raises the chances people will not go along with what is being proposed.

I started the Slow Leadership movement to encourge people like yourselves to question the everlasting haste we’re subjected to in the name of “progress” and “efficiency.” It’s a false link. In a civilized society, both are possible without denying anyone the time to think fully.

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 22:19:49 +0000

I’ve been meaning to post about this, but until I get the chance: I agree with your comment Ian, in that the fact that the PM might have slept on it and thinks it’s the “Right Thing to Do” doesn’t mean that he should try to get it through without discussion. 30 mins to digest a 1252 page document is not valid… as you say too Colin, that’s not leadership, it’s use (or abuse) of authority:

As Natasha Stott Despoja said regarding a similar rush through parliament:

Why are we here? We are not allowed sufficient time for discussion, assessment of legislation, scrutiny and review. That is our job. That is what we get paid to do. We are being denied the opportunity to do it. The government does not seem the least embarrassed by it although Senator Hills absence from the chamber may suggest otherwise.

Strange days…

By: RodeoClown

RodeoClown — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 21:48:44 +0000

Oh, I agree completely that the PM will have slept on it. I’m sure he thinks it is best, but it is the other people who aren’t demonstrating leadership by not fighting to get the time needed to properly digest it. I also think that he should’t have rushed it through.

Thanks for your thoughts.

By: Colin Tyrrell

Colin Tyrrell — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 10:05:53 +0000

Hi Ian. Interesting thoughts. Consider this: what exactly is a leader? or maybe who is a leader?
A look at wikipedia’s definition is mostly about people who a in positions that should display leadership.
Which would be fine if they were already a leader. I think that there are 2 sorts of leadership – those who are and those that think they are. bit like binary, really.
Those that think they are tend to fall in to the category of a person in a position of authority. Like the PM. Like a manager in the workplace. But does this make them a leader. I don’t think so. They have the authority to make decisions that ultimately affect us – the little people. But does this make the people want to follow them?
On the other hand you have the person who is a leader (and often they don’t think of them selves as one – well mostly early in their life as one.) They are the people/person who lives to help others. the person who stops and listens, who hears what people says and makes considered decisions. In other words they deliberate on what action to take. These people may be be in positions but are not always.

Slow leadership – listens now, reflects on it, decides later.
The time of reflection will increase with the importance of what is at stake.

A bit like what makes a good first aider – they stand back and reflect before taking action. They take in the whole picture of the situation to ensure that they can minimise or eliminate any unnecessary injury to all around, then tend to the injured. How long does this take maybe 30 seconds.
A good leader will listen now, get the facts, think about it (maybe sleep on it) then act.
What you wrote about isn’t leadership. It is the use of authority, in this case given by the people, to achieve an objective.
However, I think, you will find the PM has actually slept on it, it is just that the rest followed like sheep, and did as the party said. But then that is another matter.
Consider some of history’s great leaders, they are the ones that inspired their people/followers to great heights of feats. Some are even captains of sporting teams