The failures in the banking system in 2008, and heightened geo-political risk today, raise the question: what does leadership look like in a complex, fragmented and fast-moving world? Without presuming to have the answers, but recognising this to be a key issue facing business today, Fidelio hosted a dinner for General Sir Richard Shirreff, recently retired as NATO’s Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe, and a small group of Executive and Non-Executive Directors. Our subject was leadership at the front and beyond.
Business executives typically hold military achievement in high regard and our guests were no exception. Front line experience, be it in Iraq, Bosnia or Northern Ireland has an intensity and risk quotient seldom seen in a corporate environment. The courage and clarity of purpose demonstrated by highly effective military leaders is rare in the business world.
Rank does not confer privilege or give power. It imposes responsibility.
– Peter F. Drucker
Leadership in the military is so impressive because the armed forces perform at their best under circumstances of extreme stress, indeed danger. This is of course precisely when business frequently comes unstuck.
A core purpose of the military is to be prepared to fight on behalf of the nation and therefore to be fit for purpose in situations of grave risk and great uncertainty. Indeed within the armed forces leadership is predicated upon the camaraderie and team spirit of tightly knit units whose identity has been forged over a number of years. Robust processes are in place, including demanding training and exercises, which ensure that a particular response is embedded, even under enemy fire.
And although there has been loose talk of bonuses for individual performance, the military is characterised by a very high degree of loyalty to immediate colleagues in arms. The motivation is typically intrinsic with a keen sense of the importance of the job that is being done.
Clearly this distinguishes the military from business. After all, the majority of businesses draw upon an often very mobile and sometimes transient work force. Fortunately it is rare that executives have to depend upon their colleagues in life or death situations. Additionally the performance culture has taken business a very long way down the path of individual reward for individual performance. It is often argued that business must be free to remunerate generously in order to attract and retain the best talent.
So are we right to be looking for analogies between the military and business? One dinner guest suggested that parallels between the two spheres are tempting but misleading.
Fidelio’s conclusion is that the lessons of military life at the front cannot be transferred one to one into a corporate environment. Corporates and the military are clearly different beasts. But it is surely valid to raise the question – would corporate leaders benefit from being part of loyal and disciplined teams with crystal clear shared values and common purpose? Almost certainly.
Moreover, in a fast changing, fluid environment with a high risk that the best people may be poached by the competition, corporates would surely do well to place a premium on leadership, team building and nurturing talent from within the organisation.
Over dinner with Sir Richard Shirreff, our guests also explored leadership beyond the front. In this context we looked at the advanced stakeholder engagement skills which today characterise senior military roles. Here we saw quite obvious parallels between the military and the corporate sphere.
Clearly CEOs of multinational organisations, in common with the most senior military leaders, do well to understand geo-political risks that threaten to disrupt business as usual. Equally, senior executives and military leaders appreciate the importance of the political narrative. In both spheres leadership extends to engagement with governments, multilateral bodies, NGOs and opinion leaders. Corporate leaders would almost certainly include the regulators for good measure. As Richard Shirreff put it: “whatever we do alone is not as important as what we do together.”
In addition, without being trite, the ability to win hearts and minds in a complex, interconnected and multidimensional world is surely a core leadership competence within both the military and corporate spheres.
And these similarities continue. The recent EU privacy ruling gave individuals the right to be forgotten. This clearly impacts the search engine business model to the extent that Google CEO, Larry Page, conceded “I wish that we had been involved in a real debate … in Europe. That’s one of the things we’ve taken from this, that we’re starting the process of really going and talking to people.”
The privacy debate highlights the relevance of advanced stakeholder engagement skills in senior military and corporate roles. Indeed the example of the privacy ruling leads neatly into the surveillance and security minefield that politicians, the security forces and corporates have all found themselves navigating, particularly in the light of the Snowden revelations. Admittedly this is murky territory, but one point is clear – military, corporate and political leaders are all under threat in the new cyber theatre of war.
As you can see, our dinner guests covered an enormous amount of territory in the course of the evening. We concluded that where there are clear distinctions between corporate and military leadership, these relate in no small part to the very different relationships that are established within a unit that ultimately may face enemy fire versus looser relationships between employees in a corporate.
Core values in any organisation… are not just morally nice to have; they are functionally indispensable.
– General Sir Richard Shirreff
But surely it is relevant for business to look to the military example. After all leadership based on individual character, trust, moral courage, resilience and the ability to communicate and inspire based on clearly understood core values is surely fundamental to success across both the civil and military sectors.
Additionally, there are clear parallels when it comes to sophisticated levels of stakeholder engagement.
And then there is the question of the parapet. We have seen populist sentiment gather against financial services, technology and tax evasion. In this situation CEOs are typically advised to keep a low profile. We simply raise the question, drawing upon military examples, is there another model of leadership? Putting one’s head above the parapet and articulating clear values-based strategy, along with a rallying call, is a pretty traditional and compelling way to motivate and lead the troops in whatever walk of life.
Fidelio High Notes – June 2014
- High level of Executive Search activity, including across senior Communications, Public Affairs and Governance roles
- Fidelio is also supporting clients internationally with Board and Executive Committee Development programmes
- Fidelio hosted a private Board breakfast with Dame Alison Carnwath on “The role of the Chairman in promoting greater Board diversity and effectiveness”
- Fidelio delivered the 2014 IR Society Annual Conference closing panel with CFOs from Sainsbury’s and Santander UK on the strategic value of IR and career implications
- Fidelio will speak at the EFFAS Conference, Madrid, on “The Necessary Skills and Profiles for Investment Professionals in Financial Markets”
Please contact us with comments or for more information at info@fideliopartners.com