Quora Answer: What Personal Story Can We Share for a Humorous Toastmasters Ice Breaker Speech?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “What is the best thing in one’s life one can talk about for a Toastmasters ice breaker speech? I want it to be humorous.” 

This is difficult to answer since we are all different.  You have had an entire life, your hero’s journey.  As such, pick an event, something that you feel is significant, and resonates with an audience.  It has to be a story of failure and triumph, or a journey of discovery, or even a poignant moment in your life.  When you examine your life, and consider it with an artistic license, there are thousands of stories you can tell.  However, there are some conventions you should adhere to. 

Firstly, begin with an opening statement.  People need to know where to begin.  You then craft that story with this opening statement as an anchor.  In the course of your story, stick to one event.  Focus on depth, as opposed to breadth.  When you are done with that, circle back to that opening statement, and make it inclusive.  That statement has now become a call to action.  That is the intent of the speech. 

Humour is a challenging aspect of speech, if you are not, naturally, a funny person.  You need to practice telling jokes, and making witty remarks.  That is a skill acquired over time.  In the mean time, you can “borrow” humour by building your story around a humorous quote.  Humour is found in the delivery.  That means slowing own your speech, and varying your pitch.  You also need to embrace the uncomfortable pause at the end of the joke to give the audience time to laugh.  For newer speakers, that takes courage.  You can consider situational humour, in which case, your powers of description must be honed.  Alternatively, play with words and engage in misdirection as a form of humour.  This requires mastery of timing coupled with deadpan delivery.  The only way to be good, is to start.

Club Officer Training II Workshop: Leadership & Succession Planning in Toastmasters

The following are background notes for a presentation delivered at District 80 Division G’s Club Officer Training II, held on 8^th January 2022.

Before anything else, understand what we are discussing.  Parties frequently use the same words while meaning different things.  Leadership is not management.  Management is a part of leadership, but not all of it.  It is possible to be an effective manager without being a leader.  It is impossible to be an effective leader without managing.

Consider your own leadership journey, because it evolves.  Reflect on different periods of life, gaining experience, competence, and authority, and how style changes with each.  Style is also shaped by circumstance and context.  No single leadership style exists, and a leader who moves an organisation only one way will eventually fail.

Consider, too, whom you take as role models, because that choice defines how you understand leadership itself.  True leadership is not known by flash.  A great leader is often only appreciated after he steps down, since while he holds the role, he is meant to be an unobtrusive presence, a source of wisdom and institutional knowledge rather than a spectacle.

My own role models include Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli, Count Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord, Major General Carl Philipp Gottfried von Clausewitz, Fleet Admiral Chester William Nimitz, and Chanakya Kautilya.  Few people recognise these names outside serious students of history.  Every one of them shaped the great leaders who came after.  I prefer ruthless efficiency to good public relations.  These are people of substance, not flash.

John Davison Rockefeller Sr. said, “Good leadership consists of showing average people how to do the work of superior people.”

Aspects of Leadership

There are many aspects of leadership.  This session covers three, and the differences between them.  We had already run the Executive Leadership Incubator across four sessions, with Toastmasters International President Margaret Page joining for the fifth and final session’s dialogue.

To paraphrase Sun Tzu, if we know our enemies and know our friends, victory is certain.  If we know Heaven and know Earth, victory is complete.  A complete victory means never having to fight the same battle with the same people again.

Personal leadership is what we exercise in our own lives.  We cannot lead others if we cannot lead ourselves, governing our lower appetites, our tongue, our thoughts, long before they harden into words and actions.  A man who cannot control his own appetites has no business leading anyone else.  That is the foundation of our values.

Executive leadership sits closest to management.  Management controls and deploys resources, including people, for maximum effect.  Executive leadership is the management of leaders.  It is not micromanagement.  Micromanagement is what happens when a leader distrusts himself or his team and feels compelled to intervene in the minutiae.  Executive leadership sets a direction for a defined term, meeting immediate goals, whether a quarter, a fiscal year, or a Toastmasters term.

Strategic leadership belongs to senior management, setting goals and articulating a vision that extends beyond the current horizon, planning for a time when the people currently involved are no longer around.  Just as we plan for our presence, we must plan for our absence.  That is what empowerment means.

Personal Leadership

Leadership works by example, because a leader who does not lead by example loses moral authority, and losing moral authority is fatal.  Machiavelli wrote, “So much depends on reputation.  Guard it with your life.  Reputation is the cornerstone of power.”  Leadership is the exercise of power.  That is the sacred trust behind it.  If you lead, you are a leader whether you hold a title.  A title conveys authority.  Leadership is you.

Reflect on your own personal values.  Every officer cadet programme, every management programme, every serious system teaches this on its first day.  It carries many historical names, chivalry, futuwwa, and others, and it determines how you treat people and face adversity.  These personal values must align with the organisation’s collective values.  In Toastmasters, we stand for education, nurturing, and mentorship.  Nobody has arrived, because the perfect rhetorician does not exist.  We are all working toward the next horizon.

Personal leadership, then, is about legacy.  It is never a public relations exercise.  There will always be people you disagree with, rivals, contenders, or a clash of interests.  We represent our clubs, our Division, our District, and contending differences are inevitable.  Do an excellent job, remain sincere in praise and criticism, stay firm in your values, and even your detractors will grant you some respect.

Oscar Fingal O’Flahertie Wills Wilde said, “Every effect that one produces gives one an enemy.  To be popular, one must be mediocre.”  Anyone who wants to be good at something must accept enemies as the price of it.

Executive Leadership, and Why It Depends Entirely on the Bench Beneath You

Leadership is a team game.  You are not a leader alone.  You are a leader among leaders.  A leader of mere followers is nothing more than a mob boss.  Effective leaders surround themselves with leaders.  One quality I look for when assembling an Executive Committee as club president, a Council as Division Director, or a board as Chief Executive Officer, is competent aggression: people who will challenge me, tell me when I have overstepped, and force me to reconsider a decision.  Every knife must stay sharp.

Look at the Division Council I ran as Division Director.  Half a dozen people could step into my role tomorrow, and the system would run without me.  Look at AIA Toastmasters, and a dozen members could take the presidency at a moment’s notice.  That is the system worth building.

Michael Dammann Eisner’s tenure at The Walt Disney Company offers the clearest warning of what happens when a leader builds nothing of the kind.  Eisner ran Disney for 21 years, transforming it from a struggling studio into a media giant, and grew increasingly resistant to cultivating any credible successor along the way.  He forced out studio chief Jeffrey Katzenberg, who left to co-found DreamWorks and later sued Disney for US$250 million.  He installed his friend Michael Steven Ovitz as president in 1995, a relationship that collapsed within fourteen months, with Ovitz departing holding a US$130 million severance package.  By 2004, Roy Edward Disney and Stanley P. Gold led a shareholder revolt that forced Eisner from the chairmanship and, soon after, from the CEO role itself.  The board, after months of searching, failed to find a single credible external candidate and handed the job to Eisner’s own deputy, Robert Allen Iger, by default.  A leader who spends two decades removing every plausible successor leaves his own board with no choice when the moment finally arrives.

For this system to work, there must be a written plan.  One of the first actions I took as Division Director was drafting a Division Strategic Plan in writing: a handover procedure for Area Directors, workshop management, leadership training, and a chain of command for every event should the primary organiser be unavailable.  As President of AIA Toastmasters, I wrote a three-year strategic plan for the club.  We conduct after-action reviews of every programme, document the feedback, and write down the procedure for everything.  Both Division G and AIA Toastmasters plan the entire year in advance, completed in May and endorsed by June.  Should the entire leadership team vanish overnight, enough paperwork exists for a new team to step straight in.

This documentation must carry both the mission, the plan for the current year, and the vision, the overarching plan spanning multiple terms, continuously adjusted as circumstances change.

Benjamin Franklin said, “By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail,” a well-constructed chiasmus that has outlived every other line for which he is remembered.

Strategic Leadership

Where is Toastmasters now?  Where is your club now?  Where are you personally?  We faced a global pandemic and an economic contraction, the largest since the Great Depression, something none of us had prepared for.  Has this affected club attendance?  Genuinely.  Is that a problem?

I contend it is an opportunity.  A club’s strength is not its numbers.  It is commitment to the programme, and securing that commitment requires giving members something to believe in.  That is why we plan, and why we articulate the plan clearly, or else much gets said and little gets done.  We begin with the end in mind.  Nobody builds a company without an exit strategy for its investors.  Our members have invested time and effort in our clubs and this programme.  We owe them a return on that investment, an exit strategy of their own.

To deliver that, we must see beyond the current term.  Not every goal fits inside a single term, and a club that never plans beyond its term always starts back at zero, term after term, which becomes exhausting for everyone involved.  People want to be inspired.  They need to feel part of something larger than the current committee.  Where do you see yourself, and your club, beyond this term?

Stephen Richards Covey said, “Management is efficiency in climbing the ladder of success; leadership determines whether the ladder is leaning against the right wall.”  An Executive Committee is meant to be a team of leaders, not a team of managers.

Succession Planning

Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill said, paradoxically, “Plans are of little importance, but planning is essential.”

Margaret Edith Weis wrote, “Plans are figures drawn in the sand; easily changed when the wind blows.”

No matter how carefully we plan succession, circumstances change.  We do not see the future, and we barely control the present.  We must still plan.  Succession planning is the process of identifying and developing future leaders capable of stepping into vacant roles when they arise.

Planning starts the moment you take on any leadership role.  You are planning for your own obsolescence, your own redundancy.  Grooming successors resembles gardening, except the plants keep moving around the garden and need to be herded back into position.  A succession plan is a guideline, held with enough flexibility to adjust as circumstances shift.  Toastmasters calls this mentorship, though it is far more.

Three considerations matter most.  Commitment first, since a highly capable person without commitment offers nothing.  Potential second, distinct from current ability, since potential is where a person can grow and where you can grow alongside them.  Values third, because someone pleasant to you but rude to a waiter has no business in leadership, and will bleed members from your organisation the moment they hold real authority.

How far ahead should you plan?  A first-time officer should plan for the next term.  Once that habit is set, plan for three years, long enough to give a club a larger plan without drifting into fantasy.

Leaders: Found, or Created?

Every person carries some leadership potential, though the degree varies.  President Dwight David “Ike” Eisenhower said, “Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it.”  People follow great leaders and, in following them, become leaders themselves.  That is why this session began with personal leadership and values.  Personal leadership is integrity and responsibility.  We want people with beliefs, willing to stand up for them.  A person who tries to please everyone becomes a leader who pleases nobody, lacking the integrity anyone can trust.  Leadership is never a popularity contest.

Watch how a person treats those who offer no immediate benefit, and are unlikely ever to.  That behaviour predicts how they will act once they hold real power.  Beware of anyone indiscreet, or worse, anyone who speaks about others behind their backs.  Put such a person into authority, and the divisions that follow take years to heal.

A leadership succession system needs core values the next generation must uphold, and anyone who fails that standard should be set aside.  Fixing the consequences of bad leadership costs far more effort than being selective in recruitment and promotion from the start.  Brian Tracy said, “Become the kind of leader that people would follow voluntarily, even if you had no title or position.”

When we eventually step down, however well we performed, we will be judged by what we leave behind, and much of that judgement rests on the leadership structure we built to succeed us.  Field Marshal Bernard Law Montgomery said, “My own definition of leadership is this: the capacity and the will to rally men and women to a common purpose and the character which inspires confidence.”

We begin with the end in mind.  We secure our legacy by leaving what we built in better hands.

---

Terence Nunis, DTM | Division Advisor, District 80 Division M | Club Advisor, AIA Toastmasters | Past President & Founder, Awesome Toastmasters

Reflection on Engaging Humour Pathway: Everyone is a Critic

The following is the text of my prepared speech, “Reflect on Your Path” project.  This was delivered at AIA Toastmasters.

My fellow Toastmasters, esteemed guests, and random hobos.  Good evening, greetings and salutations.  We all love nothing better than a captive audience. 

This is my third Pathway completed, and next year, I will be doing another.  The idea is to work towards my second Distinguished Toastmasters, because, well, I can.  Also, because I have no other hobbies, and the alternative is exercise.  What I must say, however, is that Engaging Humour, as a Pathway, is far more challenging that Dynamic Leadership and Visionary Communication.  A dynamic leader simply needs to point to a goal over the horizon, and then sit back.  A visionary communicator merely needs to find someone to blame for tomorrow’s woes.  We do it well, and that is leadership.  Humour is such a personal, cultural phenomenon.  We have yet to satisfactorily figure out why people laugh,  We have yet to document exactly what people find humorous.  We do not know precisely, how they engage with mirth.  We only know that we all find different things funny, and for different reasons. 

As such, Engaging Humour is a journey of the self, not the other.  Before contemplating the humour of another, I need to understand what I find funny, or at least, amusing.  In that journey of discovery, looking within, and reading material from comics, comedians, and wits, I have come to an epiphany, a realisation, that humour is born of discomfort, of coping with pain and loss, or even as a means to aggrandise the self because no one wants to feel belittled, diminished, discarded.  So we resort to humour. 

Personally, humour has always been very much an intellectual exercise.  What we laugh at tells ourselves, and others, a lot about who we actually are.  There is no safer humour than laughing at ourselves.  Dr. Stephen William Hawking said, “Life would be tragic if it weren’t funny.”  Essentially, humanity is a virus with clothes, ascended apes.  We should not get ahead of ourselves.  To that end, we live our lives to be a better example, or a spectacular warning. 

Humour is our way of coping at our troubles, our failures, our stresses in life.  Humour is the reason people with small children do not eat their young.  Humour is the reason couples stay together at the worst of times. Or maybe it is BDSM sex.  One or the other.  Humour is how much of humanity collectively decided that democracy was the best way to govern.  What better way to manage the clowns that vote them into political office? 

In this reflection, I have to come to realise that any humorous speech must address some point of pain.  It can be relationships.  It can be the economy.  It can be anything.  As the speaker, we wear that speaker persona, and give voice to the voiceless, and put our collective pain in a humorous context so we can laugh at ourselves.  Secretly, we all crave a bit of pain in our lives.  That is why we invented marriage.  Socrates said, “By all means get married.  If you get a good wife, you will be a happy man.  If you get a bad wife, you will become a philosopher.”  Let me tell you a secret: Most men are philosophers.  The rest are gay.  Marriage is the reason why we have religion.  Because we have found Hell, there must be a Heaven. 

We use humour as a means to cope with our personal insecurities.  We can all relate to failure, to embarrassment, to personal loss.  And then we tell jokes about failing.  As George Denis Patrick Carlin said, “If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?”  It is humour that makes us realise that failure is not necessarily a and thing.  A lot of good things came out of failure.  Literature, art, inspiration for great works and achievements are all borne from it.  Spectacular failure birthed great achievements.  We all love that redemption arc. 

I took this Pathway because I wanted something different.  I am witty, but I am not the sort of person that does a litany of jokes.  My sort of humour is shared among close friends.  It tends to be scandalous, biting, sarcastic.  My superpower is the ability to put down a person with a cutting retort, not regale people with Disney-ism.  This is an example of my sort of humour: 

John Montague was the fourth Earl of Sandwich.  In an infamous exchange with actor Samuel Foote, which I will paraphrase, John Montagu, declared, “I think, that you must either die of the pox, or by hanging.” 

Foote replied, “My lord, that will depend upon whether I embrace your lordship’s mistress, or your lordship’s principles.” 

In my personal life, and we always emphasise a personal narrative in Toastmasters, a lot of the things I have done, or been through, are not the sort of stories we can tell in a Toastmasters meeting.  They are better told over a glass of whiskey when the children are asleep.  I have been a naughty boy.  Here is a sanitised story. 

When I was in school, I once caught about 30 tree lizards.  Those of you who are older know what they are.  They range in size from around 10 cm to more than 30 cm.  I put them in a box, and I brought them to school.  I put them at the back of the class, and left them in the box.  What happens when you leave 30 lizards in a box?  They fight.  And when they fought, the box moved.  And eventually, that box toppled over, and we had 30 tree lizards running around the classroom.  The girls screamed.  Some boys screamed louder.  The teacher screamed the loudest.  This made the lizards panic.  When they panicked, they run up trees.  There are no trees in a classroom.  There are, however, a lot of legs.  The lizards started running up the legs of the boys and girls.  A large one ran up the teachers pantyhose.  I never saw a woman in high heels jump so high.  And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how you almost get expelled. 

What does this tell us about humour?  Sometimes, it has to be uncomfortable for someone.  We can look back now, 30 years later, and even think it funny.  It was not funny then.  And this lesson applies to everything in our lives.  All our pain, all our distress, all our troubles, will one day come back and tell us it was one big lie.  We live, we learn, we then make it a joke.  Everyone is a critic, and we are our greatest critics of ourselves. 

And with that, I want to leave you with two pieces of wisdom, learned from other people’ experience. 

If you sleepwalk, never sleep naked. 

And never, ever, under any circumstances, take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night.

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.