Blog

Why Leaders Need to Follow Dick Cheney

Share on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare via email
There are a few really good executive and life coaches out there, surrounded by many who you shouldn’t trust to sort your mail, much less advise you on anything important. One in the “hire them at your peril” group called me this week and, without asking if I had time, launched on a glory-be talk, about how life is play, people are fabulous spiritual beings who forget their greatness, and how coaching should open them up to their inner purity of love and compassion. I guessed his age to be around 60, and it sounded like he’d been through every self-help, self-discovery, and self-growth evolutionary program out there.  His voice conveyed the confidence of one who had found all the gurus, learned at their feet and was now preaching a message that was the highest, best expression of all of them, whipped together with vanilla sprinkles and Splenda. Then he said the words that inspired this week’s CBS Money Watch blog post.  “Do you have any advice for me?” he asked.  A principle of coaching is to never do it without permission, and he was asking. So I told him. “Become Dick Cheney.” “But… Dick Cheney is evil,” he said, “he represents everything my life is directed against.  He’s not open, loving, caring, and he lives in a world of scarcity, not a world of abundant love and joy.  He’s Darth Vader.  He even has someone else’s heart beating in his chest.” “Right.  Become him.  That’s my advice.  Take or leave it.” Think about it.  If you hired this coach—let’s call him Fred—to help you in your business, what advice would he offer about a political problem?  How would he deal with a manager who is out to get you, who is spreading lies and rumors about you, undercutting you, laughing at you being your back, and getting to others to join in the sarcasm fest? Probably open a dialogue, go to lunch with him and find his inner self.  Fred would say that you’ve falling victim to his dark side, and that the light is always more powerful. There’s a bit of leadership folly that the Fred’s of the world just don’t get.  There’s evil in the world.  And evil must be met with an equal force, and higher aspirations.  Truman believed that if he could just meet with Stalin—man to man—that he’d be able to impart some good.  While Churchill was warning the world that the Nazis were up to no good, the government of his country ignored him and used good listening techniques instead.  America has repeatedly focused on dialogue with North Korea, and South Korea took this approach to the extreme with its Sunshine Doctrine of love and joy toward the prodigal North.  Show them love, they will love you back.  Except, not so much. That view is embodied in Fred, and thousands like him.  Fred’s clients become the Aspirational leaders that I wrote about in CBS Money Watch this week.  Ironically, the Political leaders need him, but would look at him with such disdain that they’d crush him, just for the fun of it. So what to do? First, assess yourself on the Political-Aspirational continuum I wrote about on CBS Money Watch. Second, focus on building your capacity on the side that’s currently a strength.  If you’re Political, become more Political.  Read books like Robert Green’s 48 Laws of Power.  If you’re Aspirational, dance with bunnies, read Marianne Williamson books, and seek inner peace. Third, learn balance by developing the side that’s not as strong.  So whatever you did in step two, do the opposite now.  Find a mentor who is great where you are not.  Political leaders need Aspirational mentors, and vice versa. In the end, what we need is “positive politics.”  Politics played with a higher purpose at the helm.  If you don’t, you’ll end up irrelevant (Aspirational) or part of a system that is ultimately self-destructive (Political).  But as I said to Fred, the choice is yours.
About the Author

Dave LoganAs Co-founder and Senior Partner, Dave’s job is to connect people to members of the CultureSync tribe and then get out of the way. That’s a long way of saying he doesn’t do any actual work, other than consulting, writing, giving keynotes, or hiding from everyone at CultureSync by teaching at the USC Marshall School of Business, where he’s been loitering since 1996. When people try to make him sound credible, they say things like New York Times #1 author of four books, consultant to three dozen Fortune 500 companies, and PhD in organizational communication from the Annenberg School at USC.View all posts by Dave Logan →

  • Paco

    Wow…how “politically” correct….(pun intended)

    Sometimes the truth is not always butterflies and forget-me-nots….

    Good stuff Dave.

  • http://www.tariqhassan.com Tariq Hassan

    Hi David,

    I have no qualms with your conclusion about political leaders. But the only problem is the concept of “get into power ( by any means necessary) and then do some good”.

    But isn’t that the problem with politics now? Business and government. No one has the cajones to be honest truthful or upfront.

    I don’t disagree with you, but it’s somewhat disheartening to think that the upper echelon will always be populated by people that mainly know politics and have no aspirations towards anything better( or that’s what I’ve seen in the corporate( and government) climate today

    Basically I see people with good ideas crushed by those with a lust for influence and power, but bereft of any aspirations.

    And in the end the ship continues sinking..

    Hopefully there is some sort of compromise at a point. I’m definitely more an aspirational leader, but I don’t mind going head to head with anyone politically.. But in the end, I value my peace of mind more than the excitement of the fight.

    • http://www.culturesync.net Dave Logan

      Hi Tariq,

      Thanks for your honest reply. There is another way: for leaders at the top to be BOTH political and aspirational. The point is, Political Leader will win in a battle with Aspirational Leader, most times. So the point is to be both, using politics rather than being used by it. Consider the term “positive politics.” Steve Sample (president emeritus of USC) wrote a great section on how leaders use “atrocities” (Machiavelli’s term) on behalf of the institution they serve. Great leaders (think Churchill or Lincoln) don’t shy away from a fight. And their choice of which fights to engage is based on their values, and on the tribes they serve.

      Dave

  • m.s.russo

    In Education, there is a great dichotomy in the regard of aspirational (belonging-driven, and ‘fun’-driven) and political (power-driven, control-driven).
    The best teachers are aspirational (thought they might not be the ‘most effective’ ones statistically), the best administrators are political. However, there is no way to become an administrator without being in the trenches and being in the trenches (with students) is not something that political people do well (meaning raising achievement scores of ‘failing’ students).
    I wonder if you do any consulting with Public School Systems (ISD) and if you have thought to talk with the different Administrative Associations to make them aware of this dichotomy.
    I know Harvard often goes to these groups to encourage Executive Education “workshops/short courses” and I wonder if those aren’t causing education to function more like a for-profit business than a public service utility?
    Thought perhaps, you’d enjoy the questions and metacognation (to be metacognitive) of them.

    • http://www.culturesync.net Dave Logan

      Great thought. As someone who was responsible for USC’s executive education function, such programs can encourage Political and Aspirational leaders to come together, and learn from each other. The point is, Aspirational Leaders often don’t know how to engage in bully tactics, so they withdraw–often ion the classroom in your example. And Political Leaders don’t lack a heart, they just haven’t found a way to integrate their heart with what they see as political realities. Again, both can learn here.