Middle East Leadership – Egypt

by

A leaderless attempt to transform Egypt?
Following the events of the past week or so, I am struck by the increasingly frequent references to the lack of visible leaders to the protests calling for the ouster of the current president of Egypt. Recent television commentary suggests that the protests began with text messages and online discussions that thus far are not attributed publicly to anybody.

Is it possible for a virtual network to take on the characteristics of leadership? Is the current situation one in which the initiators of the protest movement are remaining in the background, perhaps for their own safety, while others collectively lead?

While the ousting of the current Egyptian president is the presenting issue, is this an example of diverse groups with potentially conflicting goals and objectives rallying around the one point on which they all agree? If so, who will sort out the potentially significant differences and how? Who will ultimately emerge from the reported chaos to unify and lead in Egypt?

Egypt protests
As events continue to unfold in Egypt, Tunisia, Lebanon, Yemen, Jordan, and elsewhere, what new leaders will emerge? What roles, practices, and behaviors will the citizens of countries seek? What leadership style will emerge for the evolving context of these countries? Will the leadership style be charismatic, collegial or collaborative, autocratic, situational, or something else, even a unique, situationally-based style?

What vision will emerge from the current conflict situation for leaders to communicate? Press reports in Egypt paint a picture of change and hope, a familiar theme that few would suggest is unique to the United States. Change to what? Hope for what? Will emerging leaders be content with motivational generalities promising something different from the past and, if so, will the populace be content with non-specifics or will they demand detail?

Will leaders seek to not only promote their personal thoughts and agendas or will they collaborate and build consensus among other leaders and interest groups as a coalition to build something new? Will the new leader be as autocratic as the replaced leader seemed to be? Will the new leader communicate and live into a desire to seek what is good for the community even if it is at the expense of personal gain or will the new leader seemingly focus on personal enrichment?

Will the new leader attempt to reconcile the various potentially conflicting parties? If so, what will that reconciliation look like? How do broken relationships get healed and by who? How do have’s and have-not’s come together in community?

What values will emerge as important? Will the culture change and , if so, how? What moral and ethical implications may emerge from the conflict?

Job Creation and Recovery

by

It appears to me that the public discussion, at least coming out of politicians and the press in Washington, DC, seems to be missing several key points in the encouragement of businesses to create jobs.

For 25 years, I have, among other things, helped companies and government entities to improve productivity and operational and financial performance. For decades, companies have pursued improved productivity, leaner operations, and more efficient processes, with less waste, less rework, and less labor content. Consultants like me have helped government entities and companies in most, if not all, industries tie staffing levels to demand for products and services. I’ve helped insurance companies align staffing with sales activity, policies in force, and claims caseload. I’ve helped an accounts payable department in a government entity tie staffing to incoming bills to be paid. I’ve helped startups understand the timing of when to add staff, add executives, expand offices, and open new offices, all tied to workload.

Of course, I have done many other things but the point is that the mindset of people in the US economy is geared to connecting hiring to increased workload and demand for products and services. For fifty or sixty or more years, companies have been trained to avoid speculative hiring and to not add staff until existing staff is “fully” utilized with an acceptable level of overtime.

Government entities may have the luxury of hiring without corresponding demand for goods and services, but for-profit companies no longer feel they have that option. In this economy, it may not be reasonable to expect companies in the US to hire until demand for goods and services improves. Perhaps that is the intent of the various economic stimulus packages, but the connection, other than providing cash, between stimulating the economy and stimulating hiring is cloudy, perhaps as indicated by the tepid hiring and slow recovery.

If the federal or state governments want to stimulate hiring, the stimulation needs to be directed at demand and not simply at providing funds to act on assumed demand. The large cash hordes in so many companies may be the best indication that cash is available but demand is growing weakly, if at all.

Transitioning Out of Latent Conflict in Kenya: A Call for Leadership

by

The continuing political crisis in Kenya, as reported at The Independent among other places, continues to surprise some and disappoint many who have been to Kenya for business or pleasure. Having visited Kenya 12 times since 2004, to attempt to offer hope to refugees at the Kakuma Refugee Camp and to serve as a resource to leaders seeking a sustainable resolution to the, until late 2007, somewhat latent conflict in Kenya, I have been disappointed yet not surprised by the recent dispute between Kenya’s President and Prime Minister. This time the conflict appears to be over the authority of the Prime Minister to discipline Cabinet Ministers; this may be the symptom rather than the underlying problem. As with 2008’s post-election violence in Kenya and other episodes of conflict in the world today, a primary issue seems to be ineffective leadership.

In recent research for my doctoral dissertation, a leadership model emerged from the consensus among 375 leaders in Uganda’s Acholi sub-region that may apply to the Kenya context. Leaders, by what they say and do, and by what they do not say and do not do, define the beginning and end of conflict, the resolution of issues, and the reconciliation of interests and of individuals. Leaders divide people and reintegrate them.

Based on input from 375 leaders in Uganda, effective leaders suppress self interests in favor of community interests; when persons in leadership positions pursue self interests over community interests, members of the community may feel that the community is receiving ineffective leadership. Effective leaders pursue, develop, and provide culturally appropriate leadership training to help groom the next generation of leaders. To the extent that the same people seem to be recycled through positions of leadership and new people remain invisible or are not developed as the next generation of leaders, members of the community may question whether promises of new vision and change are empty slogans.

Leaders seeking a sustainable post-conflict heal broken relationships, guide define and guide needed change in their community, coordinate resolution of development issues and resource acquisition and allocation. Post-conflict leaders may become pre-conflict leaders if they pursue division and the opening of wounds. Leaders communicate a compelling vision to the community, model culturally appropriate behavior, and collaborate with other leaders within and outside the community. If the vision is not compelling or is poorly communicated, if the modeled behavior is culturally inappropriate, or if the would-be leader appears to isolate rather than collaborate, community members may suggest the would-be leader, or the people in positions of leadership, are not exhibiting leadership.

The more than 17 million refugees and internally displaced people in the world today, the conflicts in Uganda, Kenya, Nigeria, Sudan, Somalia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and elsewhere may indicate ineffective leadership. The world’s refugees and internally displaced, along with those of us fortunate to not be direct victims of the world’s conflicts, deserve effective leadership and people in positions of leadership who exhibit leadership. The context for leadership in regions transitioning from conflict to post-conflict is different from the context of most other types of organizations. An appropriate model for leading out of conflict may facilitate the recovery and rehabilitation in the world’s conflict zones. Will leaders choose to lead?

Elected leaders need to set aside their self-interests and lead the whole governmental unit, whether a nation, state, or district, and not meet only the needs of their party, people group, or clan. If historical, latent conflicts exist, resolve them rather than perpetuate or rekindle them. Where consensus exists, build on it; where consensus is lacking, either build consensus or seek compatible, parallel paths. Heal wounds and restore or, if possible, celebrate differences without creating an “us versus them” climate or dehumanizing “them” because of perceived differences. Create opportunities for all to advance rather than advantages for the few.

Above all, leaders should understand that would-be followers expect leaders, especially those in elected positions of leadership, to lead. A self-described leader who lacks followers may likely find that others do not consider the person a leader or their practices to represent effective leadership. Eventually, a person in a position of leadership who does not lead may find themselves removed from their position. The history of coups, revolutions, and elections in Africa and elsewhere should provide sufficient evidence that eventually people expect their leaders to lead them.

Job Creation – Economic Downturn

by

Since the current economic downturn began, roughly coinciding with the announced collapse of Lehman Brothers, pundits and politicians have spoken frequently of the need for job creation as an essential component of economic recovery. Creating work and creating jobs seem to be two different, even if related, objectives and outcomes.

Creation of work implies a shorter horizon than creation of a china job. I create work when I identify one or more related or unrelated tasks for which compensation is appropriate for one or more individuals. Somehow a job implies longevity, if not comparative permanence, to the work. The tasks may be the same, but the duration differs.

If I want to put people to work, I simply need to identify the tasks, the skill set, the appropriate compensation, and the funding source. If I want to put people to work, the only missing components are the identification of an available labor source and the hiring of a sufficient number of individuals from the identified labor pool.

If I want to create jobs, I have a different challenge. For decades, employers have used automation and process improvement to reduce the labor content of their products and services. Some employers in some cases concluded that outsourcing or off-shoring certain jobs or functions had financial advantages that could yield financial advantages in the short or long term. In the interest of improved profitability or price competitiveness, employers made direct and indirect processes leaner with respect to labor and other resources.

Now, the call goes out to create guangzhou jobs. This call is distinct from a call to provide work to those not currently working but desiring work. This call has an implied sustainability to it.

So, employers, having dedicated resources to improving productivity and reducing labor content of products and services, now hear their elected officials promising to create jobs. As an employer, I can create jobs if I agree to reduce my profits or I can create jobs if the demands in the market exceed the capacity or capability of my workforce. The market either tells me it needs more of my existing goods or services than I can provide with my current workforce or it needs goods and services that I cannot currently provide with my current workforce.

The issue of reduced profitability may find resolution in government incentives, likely either tax benefits or direct stimulus money for hiring. A demand-driven solution seems much more difficult to implement, even though it is probably more sustainable. A demand-driven solution requires a change in the markets for goods and services.

A government funded economic stimulus package may need to provide short-term incentives to create jobs coordinated with demand-side stimulus to stimulate the market for goods and services. Do policymakers act as if they understand this?

Leading in Economic Uncertainty – A Survey

by

I encourage leaders and people who think about what it means to be a leader during the current challenging times to complete the following survey. It is long; it may, however, provide useful insight into the roles, pracitces, and behaviors of leaders as we begin the second decade of the 21st century.

Click Here to take Survey

Thank you in advance for your participation in this current research of mine.