Leadership is designed to Win
Last week (LWN #29 of 2024) I set up a three-part series of Influential Leadership conversations about real-world issues.
You were also asked to complete a piece of homework: to consider the three issues via the breadcrumbs I dropped via three infographics.
Thank you to those who made a contribution—that is the way Influential Leaders do it; they meet a Leadership Moment, then respond in a productive manner.
This week we tackle the first topic, which was set up with the breadcrumb shown in the infographic above.
In the mentioned infographic I have added ten politician’s names who have all uttered the words quoted above their names on the left.[i]
The words refer to the current civil war in Palestine, largely implying that the Israeli side has killed enough non-combatants on the Arab (Gaza side).
Let us examine those words before we look at them through the Influential Leadership lens.
“Too many innocent civilians have been killed…”
- Again, I ask, how many murders are enough? In civil society, if I murder one person, I go to jail forever (or get hanged, poisoned, shot or whatever governments do to murderers).
In a large-scale civil war (all wars are civil wars), when should the one side or both sides be satiated—i.e., have killed enough and died enough?
Lots, tens of thousands, millions seems to be the answer.
- Are there innocent and “guilty” civilians? If there are, what makes a civilian one or the other—innocent or guilty—and how do the bullets and bombs tell the difference? Is the family of a soldier guilty?
Are the nurse and doctor who treat an injured soldier guilty?
Is my guilt enough to be on the other side of the wall, the fence, the river, the border, the pigment hue, the race badge, the language…?
The evidence of hundreds of millions of bodies attest that we have been murdering each other since Human #1 went over the hill to raid, plunder and kill Human #3…
There are about 10 “hot conflicts” happening right now (July 2024) in which tens of thousands of people are being killed and maimed and injured, mostly non-combatants—the innocent and maybe not innocent civilians.
Trillions of dollars are spent on weapons (in 2023 the direct amount was $2.443 trillion, or in South African rand R44,000,000,000,000—that is trillion too).
Trillions $ are spent on research to invent and build new ways to murder lots of people, and tens of thousands of the best educated engineers and scientists are involved in the weapons development business.
Tens of millions of people (“innocent civilians”) all over the planet invest in the businesses that design, build and deliver these weapons.
Yes, we live in the AI age, 2024, but we have not moved any further in our social behaviours than Human #1 did.
It need not be so.
The ten political bigwigs listed in the infographic above are merely the tip of the problem.
War—mass murder—is a form of conflict.
A conflict develops out of a squabble, a disagreement, a difference of opinion, a belief, an interpretation of history, a previous difference…
These social situations happen in homes between children and parents; they occur in business places, teams, and anywhere that two or more humans vie for their ideas, rights, spaces, resources and so forth.
Competition amongst humans is one of our great strengths—it drives performance, excellence and progress.
The challenge is how we manage competition, differences of opinion and uncomfortable behaviours.
We need not translate disagreements into conflict.
But, wretchedly, it has been that way forever.
It need not be—it is the choice we make, not the DNA coding.
What is demanded is that our social behaviour catches up with the AI Age.
If we continue to insist—despite all the evidence—that we must function at a zero-sum level to win, the conclusion will always be conflict and war—whether with our partners, team members, people across the wall…
Any is too many!
If it was you or me, or our partners, our mother our child, who had to do the dying—would that be fine?
Would it be acceptable then that my family and friends go over the hill, across the wall, to obtain retribution—100 eyes for my one?
The Influential Leadership way is not this way.
We are in the business of win-win, of acknowledging that my life, your life, each life, is better if we value every life as much as ours and others’.
There is a better way than killing any.
One of the most insightful observers of human conflict behaviour, Sun Tzu (in The Art of War, which should be called The Art of Not Going to War), has the penultimate word this week.
Keep in mind the context of his words, and of course, the loss of meaning in translation.
I must add that I hate war and conflict—but I have been in war, and a student of war for 40 years; I know it, and it is hell.
The primary behavioural lesson for those who choose to practice Influential Leadership, is that:
- There are win-win solutions and answers when we lead, and when we find them, we all win.
Who does not want to be a winner?
If you have not yet been on the Alpha Programme journey… the right time is right NOW.
If you have, be the Leadership Activist you learned to be!
Regards,
Colin @ Karoo
We Activate Apex Skills!
Leadership Weekly Note: 3024.220724
e: colind@karoo.world
Follow The Karoo Influential Leadership on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/KarooInfluentialLeadership
[i] You will notice that I do not call these ten people “leaders”. By any sane measure, let alone an Influential Leadership audit, they are NOT Influential Leaders!
