Quora Answer: What are the Pros & Cons of Moving AFRICOM from Germany to West Africa?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “What are the pros and cons of moving the United States Africa Command Headquarters from Germany to West Africa?” 

This conversation began when Muhammadu Buhari, President of Nigeria, raised it.  He wanted Africom to be based in Nigeria.  His reasoning is that it would stabilise the region, and put American troops closer to the instability of the region. 

Having AFRICOM in continent signals greater American commitment to allies and partners in the region.  It brings resources closer to the theatre of operations in a very visible way.  More importantly, it is a public demonstration of American commitment to the commitment in the race with China to secure resources. 

Should the US choose to be based in Nigeria, the most populous and influential nation in West Africa, it will be a boost to their economy, and possibly increase trade relations.  An American base is essentially a city, and a city needs goods and services.  It would be a peg that could stabilise and pacify the immediate region.  That is what the Nigerians are looking for. 

There are several reasons why I believe this is not a good idea, from a strategic and logistics perspective.  These reasons outweigh any benefits of a proposed move.  The first is simply cost.  It would cost billions to build not just the base, but the satellite logistics hubs to supply that base.  And with that massive undertaking is the massive cost of security.  All those ships need a new port, one that no African nation currently has.  All those aircraft need a dedicated air base with at least two runways.  All those personnel need to be housed, with their families, and it would be a massive security risk to house them among the locals, unlike in Germany.  That means building entire neighbourhoods amidst a sea of potential hostiles. 

Secondly, this would be seen to give legitimacy to the Nigerian government, one that has been accused of corruption, genocide, violations of human rights, and stealing an election.  Aside from Ghana, no other country in that region actually has a government of sufficient legitimacy that any American administration wants to be seen supporting.  They played that game in South and Central America, and it will take decades to repair that damage to American credibility.  The actions of these governments have directly fuelled an insurgency that Wahhabis have hijacked, turning regional tribal conflicts into a full blown Islamist rebellion.  Boko Haram and Al-Shabab did not arise in a vacuum.  An American presence would be seen as a form of colonialism, directly ramping up terrorist attacks in the region.  We will see suicide bombings, and attacks on soft targets with even remote links to AFRICOM in the region. 

This will eventually draw the US into a police action throughout the region, sapping resources and political capital back home.  This will actually weaken American resolve to intervene in an actual conflict.  The US military has an abysmal record fighting any form of low intensity conflict.  If American intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan is any indication, this would be an expensive endeavour with little political and strategic gain.  Foreign powers such as Russia and China will take advantage of American strategic failure to increase their influence in the region.  When the Americans have overstayed their welcome, and this will happen quickly, regional powers need a foreign patron. 

Unlike Europe, the situation in West Africa is very different.  Even an African version of the Marshall Plan would fail because the civic pillars to support national development do not exist on a level enough to be a check against corruption.  All that money will disappear into a blackhole of bribes and embezzlement.  AFRICOM is doing just fine where it is.  Stuttgart is in a similar latitude, meaning that the time zone differences are minimal.  Infrastructure and local stability is already in place.  What the Americans are pursuing is a points of light strategy, where there are local FOBs and partnerships with local forces for very specific goals.  This prevents them being sucked into a regional quagmire.

Quora Answer: What Will Happen if the US Stopped Exporting Oil?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “What will happen if the US stopped selling oil to the rest of the world?”

As of this moment, the United States is the largest exporter of oil in the world, with Saudi Arabia and Russia close behind.  Canada, Norway and the Gulf make up some of the rest.  China is a top exporter of oil, extracted from Iran.  The US is also the largest importer of oil.  They sell lower grade crude, and import higher grade crude. 

If the United States stopped selling oil to the rest of the world, which has happened before, it would lead to a temporary spike in prices due to a sudden deficit in the market, and an over-reaction of market sentiment.  The world is not going to run out of oil because other produces can easily cover the deficit, especially Saudi Arabia and Russia.  The havoc would be in the commodities market and the stock market. 

The United States is never going to make that sort of decision unless there are very compelling reasons, and none come to mind.  Oil is used as leverage by the US, and keeping prices below a certain threshold functions as a form of implicit blackmail on economies that need oil to be above a certain price to finance their petro-bonds, otherwise, they would be in danger of default.  It is a means of exerting pressure on economies as varied as Venezuela, Iran, and Russia. 

Secondly, the US needs that market share for geopolitical reasons.  If they cease exporting oil, Russia is one of the countries that will fill that deficit, benefiting from raised prices.  They are major proponents of energy diplomacy.  Russia already exerts undue pressure on Western Europe through natural gas. 

Finally, such a decision would panic the market, specifically the American exchanges, whether commodities, ETF or stocks.  We will see a lot of American companies go bankrupt because there is no immediate domestic demand for their grade of oil.  The oil lobby is influential, and there will be political blowback for any administration stupid enough to even consider this.  No American president wants to preside over an economic contraction of his own making.

CI Coverage Improvements for Guaranteed Protect Plus (III)

AIA has made improvements to critical illness coverage for its Guaranteed Protect Plus (III) whole life plan.

Some People Should Never be Leaders

It is an unfortunate truth that there are too many people who get promoted to positions of leadership when they have no business being there.  Leadership is effected through competence, vision, and focus.  Within all that is the ability to manage expectations, to raise people, and to be concerned for all stakeholders.  A great leader represents a collective, not the individual. 

In our current era, there is a lot of talk about consultative leadership, servant leadership, and the committee.  It creates conditions where people are promoted to positions of leadership because they appear to be leaders, not because they are capable.  Since most people are influenced by the flamboyant and the loud, they imagine that the qualities they are looking for is attitude, confidence, and charisma.  What we have are talkers, not doers.  Leadership assessments themselves promote this bias, and this problem perpetuates itself through flawed mentorship.  When the leader is unfit, every decision is a wrong decision. 

The most dangerous of these bad leaders, and the ones who are dedicated enough to make it to the top, is the leader who is only concerned with his self-interest.  Because it is in his self-interest to succeed in the here and now, it sometimes seems that he is good for the organisation.  One of the things such leaders do is look out for potential rivals.  They will strip organisations of talent because talent is a threat to their power.  They promote sycophants, which ensures a cycle of mediocrity which will drag the organisation down long after they are gone. 

Sir David Frederick Attenborough  said, “No one will protect what they do not care about, and no one will care about what they have never experienced.”  These leaders have never experienced the strength of the collective.  They are the death of organisations in the long term, while possibly delivering growth in the short term.  Short term growth is commensurate with their remuneration.  Long term growth is not their problem. 

Another characteristic of a bad leader is narcissism.  Narcissistic leaders promote a toxic environment, since they have no empathy.  This results in high personnel turnover, and loss of institutional knowledge.  The best and brightest in an organisation have options, and they will be the first to leave.  A worst case scenario is that toxic behaviour actually opens the organisation to legal action.  A narcissist does not share the limelight, and will belittle others.  Gibran Khalil Gibran said, “To belittle, you have to be little.”  Big organisations, with big goals, cannot be lead by little men of little ability. 

Some terrible leaders are competent in every other area, except that they do not recognise the value of people.  Employees and volunteers are stakeholders.  They are neither an expense, nor are they numbers on a list.  There is a reason why it is called “human resource”, because good, trained, experienced people are a resource, an asset.  Oliver Napoleon Hill said, “It is literally true that you can succeed best and quickest by helping others to succeed.”  When our success is the success of the people around us, they become stakeholders in our growth, and we in theirs. 

One of the worst forms of leadership is the perennial micro-manager.  Because there is no delegation, all decisions are stuck with this person.  The organisation is held hostage to his every indecision.  Marcus Tullius Cicero said, “More is lost in indecision than wrong decision. Indecision is the thief of opportunity.  It will steal you blind.” 

Micro-managers do not trust their people, or the system.  Because there is this trust deficit, information is at a premium, and the management style is autocratic.  There is no room for discussion, and no place for independent input.  This creates a culture of ossification, where creativity is limited, and innovation is anathema.  Stephen Richards Covey succinctly said, “Failing organisations are usually over-managed and under led.”  When the focus is only on the self, the eye is not on the horizon, and such organisations tend to lurch from crisis to crisis, all the while falling further behind the curve. 

A good leader understands that he is only a facilitator of the success of the collective.  A great leader understands that he leads by not leading, meaning that he creates the system, nurtures leadership at every level, and allows them the space to grow.  Leaders are only meant to step in when the team needs vision, and then clarification is required at specific junctures.  They are only visible when there is an overt need, such as a crisis. 

Stephen Richards Covey said, “Effective leaders are not problem-minded; they are opportunity minded.  They feed opportunities and starve problems.”

Quora Answer: Would You Choose an Experienced or Knowledgeable Person to be Your Mentor?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “If you were asked to choose someone to be your mentor, which would you choose, experienced or knowledgeable?”

The obvious answer is experience.  An experienced person is always knowledgeable, since that knowledge is based on experiential knowledge.  A knowledgeable person without experience is not necessarily knowledgeable.  He is merely informed.  Book knowledge does not compare to experiential knowledge. 

When we seek mentors, we are essentially asking for someone to guide us on a specific path.  That mentor is there because he has walked that path, and knows a better, faster way.  What use is a mentor who has no experience?

Macro-Economic Update for Q4 2021

This is a macro-economic updates for investment insight, for the month of October 2021. 

With regards the pandemic, the delta variant of Covid-19 is challenging the positive impact of vaccine rollout.  The concern is that the declining efficacy of vaccine suggests some form of social distancing might remain in place in the foreseeable future.  As a result, exposed workers continue to delay their return to the labour market, impacting supply chains. 

Although global economic slack has continued to recede since the 2^nd quarter, 2021, progress has been uneven, and much of Asia, excluding Japan, is lagging.  The pace of recovery is increasingly limited by the global labour shortage and supply chain bottlenecks.  As winter approaches, the energy challenge in Europe and China is another risk to global growth. 

The probability of quantitative easing tapering in November has increased as further progress in reducing unemployment has been achieved.  That Federal Reserve interest rates liftoff is likely to happen in the 1^st quarter, 2023.  The developed market monetary policy stance is shifting to normalisation, creating a divergence compared to Asia, excluding Japan. 

China’s regulatory changes and deleveraging policy are impacting multiple sectors including real estate.  While the objective is to reduce systemic risks and promote long term quality growth, short term activity could be impacted.  Together with the impacts from the ongoing energy shortage, the possibility of some policy easing to counter the downcycle is increasing. 

S&P 500 companies have produced stellar earnings results, beating analysts’ estimates.  Current relative valuation still favours equities over bonds and credits, while liquidity remains ample.  Looking ahead however, risks to equity outperformance are gradually emerging.  These risks include the energy shortage, and quantitative easing tapering, in the near term; as well as Covid-19 becoming endemic, and the labour market mismatch in the longer term.  Meanwhile, although the recent rebound in US Treasury yield has improved the investment value of US credit, the yield pickup from Asian credit is still sufficient to justify the relative overweight. 

In equities we the above-trend growth among major developed economies is expected to continue to at least the first half of 2022, supporting the momentum of upward earnings revisions in developed market equities.  However, risks to equity outperformance are also emerging.  The impact of regulatory changes and deleveraging in China continues to weigh on Asia, excluding Japan, equities performance.  As such, we are maintaining a neutral allocation to the region. 

Regarding investment-grade credit, US investment grade credit default rates remain below historical averages.  The recent rebound in Treasury yield has also improved its investment value.  Asian credit remains attractive with the spread pickup.  However, the potential contagion from China’s Evergrande situation could trigger risk-off sentiment over Asia, excluding Japan, credit.  This means we recommend a reduction to the relative overweight of Asian investment-grade credit to US investment-grade credit. 

On Treasuries, US Treasury yield climbed higher after the September Federal Reserve meeting.  The path to quantitative easing tapering remains on track and the expectation on future demand and supply conditions of Treasuries will continue to adjust, resulting in higher yields.

Slide Notes for Club Workshop: Preparing to Sound Spontaneous

The following are my slide notes for the first session of a workshop conducted at West Coast Toastmasters, held on the 23^rd October 2021.  As is my habit, the background notes of my slide deck are not exactly what I present, since my programmes are interactive. 

Slide 1: Definition: What is Impromptu Speaking? 

I always like to begin with definitions.  Definitions set the parameters of understanding what we are addressing. 

Impromptu speaking is a speech that a person delivers without predetermination or preparation. The speaker is most commonly provided with their topic in the form of a quotation, but the topic may also be presented as an object, proverb, one-word abstract, or one of the many alternative possibilities. 

James Calhoun Humes, former speechwriter for American presidents, said, “The art of communication is the language of leadership.” 

Slide 2: Consider: When Do We Speak Impromptu? 

We use it all the time.  When you try to pick a girl up at the bar, when you have to answer a question in a job interview, when you try to pitch an idea to someone across the table; all these are examples of impromptu speaking. 

David Mackenzie Ogilvy, founder of Ogilvy & Mather, and considered the father of modern advertising, said, “If you are trying to persuade people to do something, or buy something, it seems to me you should use their language, the language in which they think.” 

Slide 3: Paradox: How Do We Prepare for the Impromptu? 

Here is a secret: as communicators, there is no such thing as an impromptu speech.  There are only more prepared speeches, and less prepared speeches.  The key to approaching the subject matter is not to address the subject first, but the mindset. 

Every one of us has a story.  We all have opinions on a variety of subjects.  In fact, we have friends, when given the correct topic, they simply cannot shut up.  We all have something to say, about something.  The question is, why do so many of us clam up when it comes to any form of impromptu speech? 

Mark Twain said, “The difference between the almost right word and the right word is the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning.” 

Mark Twain also said, “It usually takes me more than three weeks to prepare a good impromptu speech.” 

Slide 4: First Obstacle: Our Fears 

Few people like to be called to stand in for a speaker for a few minutes.  As many of us have noted, on average, people are more afraid of public speaking than they are of death.  That means, at a funeral, many of us would rather be in the coffin than giving the eulogy.  That is a problem. 

Why are you afraid?  What is that fear?  We need to consider our fears.  We need to name them.  We need to define them.  That is how we diminish fear.  Fear is our projection of pain or loss in a possible future.  We are afraid of things that have not happened yet.  The remedy is to live in the moment, and address that moment. 

Dale Carnegie said, :Inaction breeds doubt and fear.  Action breeds confidence and courage.  If you want to conquer fear, do not sit home and think about it.  Go out and get busy.” 

If you want to conquer your fear of public speaking, then take advantage of the air time in your club, or if you do not have a club, then join one.  Speak here, make mistakes, fail miserably, have some fun, and then do it again and again and again.  Every time you speak, you do not need to be perfect.  You only need to be better than the last time. 

Slide 5: Second Obstacle: Our Lack of Belief 

Related to fear is insecurity.  People remain silent when they believe they have nothing that others want to hear.  They look down on themselves.  They lack belief.  Belief starts when we resolve to take that first step.  Belief without action is unrealised. 

Ralph Waldo Emerson said, “To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment.” 

Slide 6: Third Obstacle: Our Lack of General Knowledge 

Sometimes, people keep quiet because they truly have no idea what to say.  It is better to remain silent, and thought a fool, than to speak and to remove all doubt.  Light travels faster than sound.  That is why certain people appear bright until you hear them speak.  Both these sayings have uncertain origin, which is why they are uncredited. 

The best way to address this is to develop an interest in the world, and have an opinion on developments and policies.  These things affect us.  We cannot exercise leadership in our sphere without any knowledge.  It is perfectly fine to be wrong.  That is how we learn. 

Slide 7: The Argument: P.R.E.P. 

There are several methods, but this is the most practical. 

Point: State your position.  You do not necessarily have to agree or disagree.  A quick thinker is able to reshape the argument and offer a different perspective.  The first 30 seconds is crucial.  This is where you seize their attention. 

Reason: Give a coherent, cogent argument for or against a contention.  It must be logical, or emotive. 

Example: Give one example to illustrate your point. 

Point: Restate your position.  When you bring a girl out on a date, bring her home.  When you bring your listeners somewhere, bring them back to the original contention. 

Rhetoric is the art of putting forth a coherent, cogent argument, for or against a point, in order to convince an audience to move to a position of your intent. 

Slide 8: Conclusion: Speak, & be Heard 

We have to communicate every day, anyway.  We might as well hone that skill.  What you need to remember is that it is not what you say, but what they hear, that matters.

Slide Notes for Executive Leadership Incubator Session 1: Picking the Winning Team

The following are my slide notes for the first session of the Executive Leadership Incubator, held on the 23^rd October 2021.  This programme was organised by Toastmasters District 80, Division G, in collaboration with Division S and Division E.  As is my habit, the background notes of my slide deck are not exactly what I present, since my programmes are interactive. 

Slide 1: Definition: The Concept of Executive Leadership 

It is my habit to always begin with definitions.  It is always important for us to begin with definitions. Definitions set the parameters of what we discuss, and establish a common understanding before building on that knowledge.  Imam Abu Hamid Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Ghazali (r.a.), the Persian theologian said, to the effect, that before we even speak of a cup, we should understand what a cup is.  What we are covering here is more than a mere cup. 

How many of us have had conversations, where we thought we were talking about the same things, even used the same phrases, but meant totally different things?  George Bernard Shaw, the Irish playwright, once observed, that the United States and Great Britain are two countries separated by a common language.  We assume we understand each other, but if the start point of our programme is different, we will arrive at vastly variant conclusions. 

There are entire books that define executive leadership.  Executive leadership is a concept, and as concepts go, there are myriad interpretations and ways to execute leadership.  While leadership is the art of inspiring and motivating a group to act towards achieving a common goal, executive leadership is the ability to manage a team, within any form of organisational structure, to fulfill organisational goals, execute strategic plans, and engage in decision making.  It is leadership within a structure, and over an extended period. 

Executive leadership works best in a hierarchical structure, where there are clear demarcations of levels of authority.  This can be a command-type structure, such as the military, in a corporation, or even a volunteer organisation.  The difference is in how we convey our thoughts and ideas.  I have served as a naval officer and an inspector of police, which are both command-type hierarchical organisations.  I have also served on the board of a volunteer welfare organisation, which is another form of hierarchical organisation.  In these cases, executive leadership is strictly expressed top down.  This contributes to organisational discipline, but does not leave room for flexibility. 

As we start this session, I want you to consider the following questions:

1. What is your motivation for being here?

2. What is your idea of executive leadership?

3. How do you plan to apply what we cover here? 

Slide 2: Contrast: Leadership is about Influence, Not Authority 

Authority is the moral or legal right of control, specific to a domain.  Influence is the power to have an effect on people.  They are not the same.  It is conceivable, indeed common, that a person would have authority by virtue of an appointment to a position, bit have no influence to effect any agenda.  Authority without influence is impotent leadership.  Influence is not gained by engaging in petty politics, creating personality cults, or engaging in strictly transactional relationships.  Influence is built by building a fortress of certainty in a landscape of uncertainty.  People are better able to relate to known quantities. 

Popularity is not a value, and not necessarily commensurate with influence.  A person could be well-liked, but discounted on account of many factors.  A person of influence is able to appeal to the other, and bring them to their side of the table, he is people-centric in his discussions with an emphasis on the other.  People open up when they feel others are genuinely interested in them.  This means influence starts at the door of service. 

Influence is built on direct personal relationships that are not transactional in nature.  This allows us to create rapport, and connect with people at a deeper level.  It is based on credibility, integrity, and mutual respect.  This carries over regardless of the power dynamic of the relationship, since people want to be validated.  When people are validated, they have a stake in the maintenance of the relationship, and this is what interpersonal influence is built on. 

These relationships can be leveraged upon, and that is how influence is exercised.  We give favours so they can be called in.  These trading of favours has no exact value to be pinned down, since the value of a favour varies according to need and consequence upon the individual.  To maintain, and grow, that relationship, it is important that effort is recognised, people are appropriately thanked, and the integrity of the arrangement made sacred.  This is a demonstration of personal integrity and values, which enhance credibility.  This functions as an influence multiplier overtime through the creation of goodwill. 

The reason we talk about influence, is because influence is the currency of power, and the building blocks of a winning team.  A winning team requires winners, and winners only want to work with other winners.  To be a credible leader, it is important to be a credible person.  That means you must be able to convince people, through past performance, that you can deliver results on a greater stage.  People do not have to like you.  They may even fear you a bit.  They may outright hate you.  But as long as they understand that you deliver, they will put their feelings aside for personal interest.  This is especially true in the corporate world.  People want results, because results means promotion and bonuses. 

Slide 3: Concept: Understanding That This is a Team Game 

A team is any group of people who perform interdependent tasks with the intent towards accomplishing a common mission, a specific objective, or a shared overarching goal.  Leadership is a team game.  A king has his counsellors and generals.  A president or prime minister has his ministers.  A leader needs his team. 

Executive leadership is too important a task to be left to one person.  A great leader, without his team, only grants ephemeral success.  We know great leaders by what they leave behind, not just what they achieve.  The moment he is gone, that team falls apart.  How many of us know about Alexander the Great?  How many of us think he was a great leader?  When Alexander the Great was asked, who would succeed him, he replied, “The Strongest.”  This lead to his empire being divided between his Diadochi, the “Successors”: Cassander, Ptolemy, Antigonus, and Seleucus.  What he built collapsed the moment he died.  The pieces of that empire all eventually faded away, conquered by Sassanid Persia and Rome. 

Alexander the Great was a great military leader, and a leader of military leaders.  He is known for his military conquests.  But when we take a closer look at his biography, he was a petulant, headstrong young man, who threw away resources and opportunities in the pursuit of immediate glory and debauchery.  His generals were like him: great fighters, poor builders.  Alexander was loved by his men, because he represented an ideal, but in the end, he left nothing behind. 

When we think great executive leaders, great statesmen, we remember people who left nations and organisations behind, stronger than when they started.  If you leave any place, any department, any organisation, stronger, you are an accomplished executive leader.  To do that, you need to build your team, your companions. 

Almost a thousand years after Alexander the Great, an orphan was born in Arabia.  We all know him as Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah (s.a.w.).  He is considered the founder of Islam, but we are not here to talk about theology.  We are here to talk about leadership.  Coincidently, according to some Muslims, tonight is considered the night of his birth, 1,500 years ago. 

When Muhammad (s.a.w.) was born, Arabia was a desolate place, a graveyard of civilisation, engaged in internecine warfare among different nomadic tribes.  When he passed away, the Rashidun Caliphate was established, and Muslim civilisation was born.  It went on to be one of the great civilisations of human history.  It conquered Sassanian Persia, and unlike Alexander, made it the heartland of the Muslim world.  For 800 years, much longer than it has ever been Christian, Sicily, Spain and Portugal, were Muslim.  They defeated the Mongols, the Eastern Romans, even the Chinese.  More importantly, these unlettered nomads birth 600 years of knowledge and advancements in human knowledge.  One man can change the world. 

I am not saying that to be an effective executive leader, we all need to start founding world religions.  But if each and every one of you, can inspire one person, to believe in your ideals, and your ideas, and build on it, you have laid the foundation to a legacy.  That is the ultimate intent of executive leadership, as a team game. 

Slide 4: Reciprocity: To Have a Team, Be a Leader People Will Follow 

What makes a good leader?  We all have ideas.  We all have our own understanding.  Consider this: In 1994, I was a merchant naval officer, a deck cadet then.  While we were crossing the Atlantic, we got caught in a storm.  Our Master, or Captain, as you landlubbers know it, stood at that bridge, and stared into the whites of nothingness in the night.  He seemed immovable, as he gave steering commands.  “Steady as she goes, helmsman.  Ride the waves.  Starboard 10.  Port 15.  Brace. …”  And so forth.  We were there for hours.  We rode 30 metre waves, the rollercoaster ride from Hell. 

Years later, when I was a commissioned officer, I realised that all he did was look like he knew what he was doing.  There is no real way to go through a storm like that except point at the waves, and pray.  And that is leadership.  Max De Pree was an American businessman and writer.  He wrote “Leadership is an Art”.  In it, he said, “The first responsibility of a leader is to define reality.  The last is to say thank you.  In between, the leader is a servant.”  This was in 1987. 

A leader redefines reality for the people he leads.  He projects certainty and confidence.  A leader cannot be seen to be defeated.  He cannot shift blame.  He cannot hide.  He is the persona of everyone’s collective hope and vision.  He articulates it, he makes it real, and he points them in the right direction. 

In this age, we talk a lot about leadership.  But after all that is said and done, a lot is said, and little is done.  There are those who imagine that leadership comes from a title.  Authority comes from a title.  There are those who believe leadership comes from seniority.  Long-service awards come from seniority.  There are those think that being a leader is about being popular.  Public relations comes from popularity.  None of these is intrinsic to leadership.  So what is leadership then? 

Leadership is to be like that master mariner in a storm.  No matter how the ship is tossed in the ocean, no matter how terrified we are, no matter how the world seems to have gone mad, we look to that man, and we follow what he says.  This is not because he has a title, or a long-service award, or is popular.  This is because we want to get through that storm, and we believe he can get us there.  So we ask ourselves, when there is a crisis, or a challenge, or a problem, do people under us look to us for a solution?  If they do, then we are leaders.  Otherwise, we are merely managers. 

To be that person people will follow, you need to exude certainty, not confidence.  Confidence is for children.  Certainty is for people who have seen the world, and understand their place.  If you do not have it, then act it until you do. 

Slide 5: Recruitment: Identifying the Team 

Building a team requires two things: the people and the structure.  The structure pertains to the values and the culture.  The people fill that structure.  When we talk about team, here, we mean more than people.  A collection of people does not necessarily make a team. 

While a team is an extension of a leader, a team also covers areas that a leader is deficient in.  The team cannot be clones of the leader.  That is what we have with Alexander the Great and his Diadochi.  That was his failure.  An example of a good team would be Napoleone di Bonaparte and Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord.

Consider Napoleone di Bonaparte.  He is thought by many to be an epitome of leadership, and to an extent he was.  A man born to lesser nobility, who rose from a minor artillery officer to Emperor of France.  And yet, I consider him a failure.  He is a man who won numerous battles, but lost the war.  He died in exile, in St. Helena.  He left France bankrupt, still surrounded by enemies; and with an entire generation of sons and fathers lost to the nation.  Carl von Clausewitz understood this.  He was a Prussian general who fought in the Napoleonic Wars, including the famous Battle of Borodino.  In his famous treatise on military campaigns, Vom Kriege, he wrote, “War is the continuation of politics by other means.” 

Napoleon understood only war, and had no clear goal.  And that is a mistake many leaders make.  They get involved in the process.  They get emotionally attached to the product, the vehicle, or the institution.  It is like a man who enjoys cycling so much that he forgot to pay attention to where he is going and finds himself lost. 

Napoleon Bonaparte said that a leader is a dealer in hope.  But selling hope alone is fraud.  There has to be a basis for it, and there has to be a consideration of ethics, values and principles.  Leadership is not about merely espousing values, but living it.  That requires a certain sense of certainty and emotional strength. 

Where Napoleon excelled, was in his utilisation of resources.  He famously said that an army marches on its stomache.  Since he began as an artillery officer, he understood it intimately.  He pioneered innovative tactics using field guns.  He paid a lot of attention to the logistics of running an army.  Most importantly, he understood his greatest resource: his people. 

A leader is only as good as the people around him.  That requires either building them up, or recruiting the best, or, a bit of both.  The consideration with having competent people is that they are also leaders.  This means that we are not just supposed to be leaders of men, but leaders of leaders.  This requires leading, not from the front, but from the rear.  A successful leader always has a great lieutenant, or several. 

That man was Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord.  Talleyrand rose from Agent-Generale of the Catholic Church in France, to First Minister of France, Napoleon’s chief diplomat and spymaster.  He eventually turned on Napoleon, and survived him to have a long and rich career.  Unlike Napoleon, Talleyrand understood the winds of change, and rode them successfully.  Whilst the public remembers Napoleon, students of leadership, and the arts of war, remember Talleyrand. 

Alexander and Napoleon were halfway there.  They had a team.  In Alexander’s case, that team consisted of inferior versions of him.  In Napoleon’s case, his lieutenant outgrew him, because he did not adapt. 

Slide 6: Generals: Finding People Who Will Talk Back 

When I started my term as Division Director, it was amidst a pandemic, and the world was no longer the same.  I needed a team that would talk back.  Every leader needs that.  He needs people who have strong wills and strong ideas, and are willing to stand their ground.  A leader who cannot manage strong characters will never achieve anything.  We should always be wary of people who flatter us, and pay attention to those who criticise us.  Flattery is a distraction if you are hungry for success.  What you need is people to contend with. 

Whether it is my company, or in any other situation, I have always opened the floor to contentions, to disagreements, to objections.  There is no ego involved.  A historical example would be the Battle of Badr.  This was the very first battle between the Madinan state and the Quraysh of Makkah.  The Muslims of Madina were massively outnumbered, and lacked cavalry and weapons.  The battle was fought at the Wells of Badr.  Muhammad (s.a.w.) and his 300 Muslims arrived first, and he deployed their forces.  One of his followers asked him, “Did God tell you this, or is it you?”  Muhammad (s.a.w.) was not an experienced military strategist. So, he deferred to those who knew better.  The Muslims held the wells, and defeated a better armed force that outnumbered them three times. 

We all need people who talk back, and tell us when they know better.  We all need to be able to listen.  In that same storm, back in 1994, at one moment, we contemplated abandoning ship.  There was a discussion among the senior officers and engineers.  Our steering was damaged, and we could not keep the ship facing the wind.  We were in danger of capsizing.  In the end, it took one man, the Chief Engineer to state that we should not abandon ship just yet.  We should try to hang on for a few hours more.  Later, we learned the life boats had been smashed by the waves.  But one man talking back, even in the middle of a storm, is sometimes what we need. 

Recruitment of the team is an ongoing process.  As they grow, they may leave and start their own teams, their own organisations.  And with that growth, is the growth of influence and reach.  It is about passing on an evolving philosophy and set of values.  When I choose my team, this is my process. 

First, I take note of how people behave with those who cannot benefit them.  People who are only nice to people who can benefit them lack integrity, and cannot be trusted.  Someone who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person. 

Secondly, I look at their personal values.  Integrity, industry, intelligence is far more important than educational qualifications and a nice curriculum vitae.  The problem with degrees and diplomas is that they tell us you are good at passing examinations; not how good you really are. 

Finally, I take note of whether they can grow and work with others.  Ambition is good.  Ambition married to insecurity is a deadly combination. 

Slide 7: Culture: Leadership is a Learnable Skill 

As important as it is to have the people for the team, we must build that structure.  Inspirational leadership is a skill that may be acquired.  Leadership itself is an active, continual process of incremental improvement and striving.  Leadership does not merely happen.  It is a culmination of a lot of work and experience.  It is the sum of applied experiential knowledge.  Leadership is the art of providing direction, giving people a vision, and inspiring them to work towards that vision.  The best of leaders develop other leaders, nurture talent, and inspire them.  The best teams are teams of such inspiring leaders. 

That is this culture of excellence, this bubble of learning, that we need.  Recruitment is an ongoing process.  Now that we know the team, we have to develop our communication channels.  This means understanding how to give an evaluation of performance and development, and having that mix of criticism and praise in our feedback to them.  It has to be honest, but it must also be constructive, subscribable, addressable, and measureable. 

As part of that feedback process, it is important to be transparent about the decision-making process as well.  This is especially pertinent when addressed disputes within the team, and fixing any form of dysfunction in the team dynamic before it takes root.  All members of the team need to feel safe enough to have their point of view without the feeling that they have to defend themselves.  We need to cultivate this plurality of views to prevent groupthink. 

Now that we have addressed the team dynamic, and values, we can talk about direction.  For there to be inspiration, there has to be positive movement.  People need to feel that they are part of something greater than themselves.  This means setting long-term and short-term priorities, and creating milestones appropriate to each category that are achievable.  There is no sense being overly-ambitious, and failing to meet deadlines because of this.  It is bad for morale, and undermines leadership credibility.  Once these long-term and short-term priorities have been set, it is important to explain the overall strategic plan specific to the team, that is married to this tactical plan.  Otherwise, they would not feel invested in it as much as they should.  This also means that these goals can be adjusted as the circumstances change, allowing tactical flexibility and giving the team ownership. 

When these steps can be implemented and reinforced, we have now created a culture of excellence that is replicable.  We are not just inspiring the team, but we are giving them the tools and opportunities to grow to become leaders in their own right. 

Slide 8: Paradox: Being a Leadership without Leading 

The paradox of leadership is that a good leader creates the team and the environment where he does not need to exercise executive leadership, except in moments of need.  A manager is not always a leader.  An example of this style is how I run my team, in our company. 

Every single member of my management team is an accomplished leader, with decades of experience.  They are all extremely accomplished in their areas of expertise, some of the best in the industry.  As Chief Executive Officer, our company is a strategic consultancy.  Our clients include policy makers in regional economies, major business leaders, and politicians. 

Leading a team of leaders does not make me a better leader.  It makes me the chief articulator of strategy.  How would you handle a team of leaders?  How would you handle them, in negotiation, with another team of leaders, on a major business deal? 

I do it by not leading.  We have our discussions and preparation beforehand.  We pick someone to lead that discussion on specific areas, and we let them be the leader there.  You cannot be an effective leader, if you do not have faith in your team. 

Question: What if they make a mistake?  In such a case, you step in, and push the discussion into another direction, or state that you would like to revisit that particular clause or contention after further discussion.  The key to this is communication before, during, and after the event. 

Here is an example of leadership failure.  Communication is key.  Size alone, and an abundance of resources is meaningless without control.  Having people, no matter how talented, without discipline, is worthless.  Organisation without cohesion is chaos waiting to be unleashed.  There is no greater example of perceived strength falling apart to failure that the Battle of Karansebes.  This was the most spectacular friendly fire incident during the Austro-Turkish War of 1787–1791. 

It was 1788, as the Turks advanced, the Austro-Hungarian Empire mobilised an army that was approximately 100,000 strong.  They set up camp around the town of Karansebes.  In the current age, it is the city of Caransebeș, in Caraș-Severin County, part of the Banat region in southwestern Romania.  The vanguard of the Austro-Hungarian army was a contingent of hussars.  They crossed the Timiș River to scout for the presence of the Ottoman army.  They found no sign of the Ottoman forces.  What they did find was a group of Romani people, who sold then schnapps. 

Hours later, a group of infantry crossed the river.  They encountered the hussars, and the alcohol.  They wanted some of that schnapps.  An argument ensued because the drunken hussars refused to share what they had bought.  It escalated.  The hussars set up makeshift fortifications around the barrel, and both sides raised their weapons.  Somewhere in all that, a shot was fired.  Both groups started fighting. 

Amidst all that, it was alleged that some of the infantry began shouting “Turci!”, meaning “Turks!”.  They wanted to scare the hussars off to steal their schnapps.  The hussars fled the scene, thinking that the Ottoman army had arrived.  The infantry also retreated.  The fleeing groups went through the camp, which alerted the other portions of the army, comprising people from other parts of the empire, who barely understood each other’s language.  In an attempt to restore order amidst the chaos, the Austrian officers, who spoke German, started shouting, “Halt!”, “Stop!”.  In all that din, some of them heard “Allah”, the war cry of the Muslim Turks. 

As the hussars fled through the camps, a corps commander, it is said that General Joseph Maria von Colloredo-Mels und Wallsee, thought that it was a cavalry charge by the Ottoman army and ordered artillery fire.  The entire camp awoke to the sound of battle.  Thinking the Turks had overrun the camp, the troops started firing at each other, thinking they were the enemy.  The entire army retreated in disarray. 

Two days later, the Ottoman army arrived.  They discovered dead and wounded soldiers, and surveyed the scene of a battle in wonderment.  Someone had routed the mighty Austro-Hungarian army to flight, and it was not them.  This is failure of leadership, failure of communication, failure of having a team. 

Slide 9: Conclusion: Begin with the End in Mind 

I treat management and leadership of organisations the way I treat chess.  In chess, we are told to think “seven steps ahead”.  It does not mean literally seven steps, but to have this habit of considering the consequences of what we do. 

As we end this session, I want you to consider the following questions, just as we did at the beginning:

1. What is your motivation for being here?

2. What is your idea of executive leadership?

3. How do you plan to apply what we cover here? 

This programme is not a series of lectures.  It is intended to incubate the next generation of leaders.  We want you to think, to grow, and to surpass us, so that we can learn from you as well.