Re: Boring firms `are killing creativity' in the workplace

Keith Cowan (cowan@pci.on.ca)
Sun, 11 Dec 1994 15:31:58 -0500 (EST)

>
> > I did not mean to imply that dramatic actions should not strive for
> > consensus. The reality in my experience is that firms that flourish have
> > the benefit of a leader who selects tough choices and pushes on in spite
> > of dissidents, demanding their loyalty and support along the way. I would
...
> How can an individual "demand" loyalty? One can inspire loyalty, or earn
> loyalty, but all that one can *demand* is compliance, often of a very
> surface nature. Often this compliance takes the form of telling the boss
> what he wants to hear, even when you know better.
I am in strong argeement with this point - nothing more eroding than
"blind obedience" to the effectiveness of an action

> misgivings. If they perceive that the decision was created by a
> trustworthy process in which they played a part, they'll do their best to
> implement it. If they perceive that the decision was jammed down their
> throats, on the other hand, they'll simply give it lip service.
>
> ebohlman@netcom.com (Eric Bohlman)
>
Where do you draw the line on involvement? Naturally the executives are
involved in the decision at least in having their say. But then how does
one execute through the next four or more levels of organization? I would
say the inspired leadership is the most productive way. The time for
consensus is long past. So I am not disagreeing, just highlighting that
your point does not refute mine. If the executive carrying the message was
one whose "say" was heard but not implemented, my belief is that they are
unlikely to carry the message as "inspired leaders"...Keith
> 

-- 
Keith Cowan       Phone: (416)565-6253           FAX: (905)764-9604
Toronto        Internet: cowan@pci.on.ca  Compuserve: 72212,51