Leadership
“Synergy”, “two powerful minds working in unison”, “complementary skills” and so on: all that we try to achieve has to be checked against reality, especially when theory meets the REAL incentives and cultural aspects of a company. As we constantly repeat to ourselves, “culture eats strategy for breakfast”. An article notes that the two co-heads of Morgan Stanley’s Institutional Securities Group can’t stand each other and, more importantly, that this personal dispute is disrupting business. The Epicurean Dealmaker wrote a very interesting analysis of this particular dispute in light of the bigger picture of the natural conflict of interests inside an investment bank. What he finds there can be applied almost anywhere else where such conflicts are, perhaps, less obvious.
Maybe it’s not a coincidence today – the last possible day for it – when it appears that there will finally be an agreement on the US debt ceiling, that we’ve decided to post on Leadership. There was an interesting book review last week in the Financial Times, and it raises the question in this post’s title. “Like other fuzzy concepts such as love and beauty, we need to study leadership even though it is ultimately mysterious. Perhaps the real aim of studying leadership, as with contemplating beauty, is to learn more about ourselves” – nicely put.
The London Business School’s Business Strategy Review (BSR) magazine/ website has a “World Business Leaders Series” worth spending some time on. We comment on a video with the Chairman of the London Stock Exchange and we highlight sections that, although intended for business in general, can also be framed for the specifics of investment management.
A 1952 executive-education course serves as a reminder that now, more than ever, we need leaders who can think for themselves. “A well-trained man knows how to answer questions, (…) an educated man knows what questions are worth asking.” Without talk of incentives, this is more a proof of the benefits of a diverse and continuous education than it is a valid “diagnosis” of today’s leaders’ conduct. Still, that is a worthy enough point.
Fred Wilson had an interesting post today on action oriented entrepreneurs/ leaders. While we don’t agree 100%, there are some interesting teasers to think about not only for the companies we study but also for our own. The situation one wants to get to is to have a team composed of people with diverse backgrounds and complementary skills – and personalities – combined with carefully-planned incentives that align individuals and teams with the company’s vision. Easier said than done, but the closer you get to this the better.
