Fast? Slow?
If you're new around these parts, I just want to say how much I appreciate your dropping by! Oh, and you may want to subscribe to my feed. Thanks, and a tip o' the hat to ya!
I’m confused.
First, a friend sent me a link to Slow Leadership, a site dedicated to helping you take the time to make the best decisions possible, instead of just making good decisions that will “do”. The eight principles of Slow Leadership:
- Right tempo
- Right attention
- Right balance
- Right perspective
- Right direction
- Right relationships
- Right enjoyment
- Right gratitude
by Carmine Coyote (is that a real name?) reasonably points out that being under deadlines and stress tends to make us accept the first solution found, rather than taking the time to seek out the best solution. I can’t argue with the idea, and it certainly sounds like a worthy goal. However, one can guess that the actual follow through would be the real crux for most people. Probably not too many who suffer from a (perceived or real) lack of time are going to be willing to slow down enough to make it work.
But still, it makes sense, yes?
Okay, now turn with me to a post by Dustin Walper, where he advocates – you guessed it – Fast Leadership. Dustin points out that many of today’s business leaders pride themselves on the ability to make fast decisions. In fact, he advocates that making a decision, any decision, is better than taking too long to deliberate.
All right, there is something to that. It’s sometimes true that when inactivity is bad, then ANY activity is better than doing nothing. I’ve experienced that situation myself. And yes, you’ve probably all heard the example of the ship’s rudder (no matter how big or small it is, it’s only useful if the ship is moving).
So which is it? Slow? Fast? I’m confused! Help me, Obi-wan Kenobee, you’re my only hope!
I guess that’s one of the fun things about having the whole world (via the Internet) at your fingertips. The absolute wealth and diversity of viewpoints on any given subject is absolutely awesome! And that’s where the hoary head of responsibility rises up. It’s up to us to choose what we’re going to do with all that information. I can almost hear the ghostly voice of Alec Guinness saying, “choose wisely!”
As in most things, could balance be the key?
You know, it would just be absolutely finer than a frogs hair if you would subscribe to my RSS feed!
4 responses so far
Middle Zone Musings is a comfortable place to stop, have a cup of coffee, swap a few stories and share practical ideas for the real world. I don't ask for much, just a bit of your brain every now and then. Have a seat, take a load off, and relax...
Dustin, your comments about most businesses’ desire to avoid risk-taking hits close to the mark. The problem is that by completely avoiding risk-taking, they were stifling innovation. Happily there seems to be a current trend moving back the other way in the business world as companies find ways to incorporate risk-taking into the corporate culture again.
Perhaps my use of the word “balance” is the problem here. I advocate, as it sounds like you do, “calculated risk-taking”. That’s what I meant by balance. It seemed to me you were advocating a path that would lead to likely destruction, but I see I was incorrect.
As for your philosophy - go for it!
Oh, and thanks for the clarification, and the feedback!
Bob,
You make some valid points. I have to admit that my viewpoint on this issue is entirely entrepreneurial, so a lot of the things very specific to risk-taking probably wouldn’t fly too well for the Fortune 1000 companies. It’s a shame that management thinks that way, because it’s the entrepreneurial types who (if successful) see much greater returns.
Furthermore, my take on success also emphasizes the idea that everything you do should be challenging, fun, and risky… in a calculated manner. Honestly, I’m not interested in a tame path to modest success filled with extensive risk analysis. Look at the Fortune 1000 CEOs and look at the world’s top entrepreneurs and tell me with a straight face that the Fortune 1000 CEOs enjoy life more.
Anyway, I’m working on a post on the issue of being more unbalanced, and trust me… it’s not as ridiculous as it sounds.
Cheers!
Dustin, what you’re advocating is more likely to end up in disaster than success over the long term. Sure, there are some shining examples of successful seat-of-the-pants decision-makers (and more likely to be individuals rather than entire companies), but that’s because they’re the ones who got the press. There are hundreds, thousands, perhaps millions of others out there who are just as successful, but are more measured in their risk-taking.
If you visualize “risk-taking” as a continuum ranging from “risk averse” to “risk loving”, I think you’ll find most companies would rather have their leadership ranked toward, but somewhere BELOW the “risk loving” level.
I’d love to conduct a survey of the Fortune 1000 and see where their leadership ranks on that scale. There are relatively few in this list who operate entirely your way.
On the other hand…
I love the idea of the “damn-the-torpedoes” philosophy, and in fact, I advocate the integration of it in business as well as life.
But I still believe balance is the key to long-term success.
NO!
Balance is what normal people try to achieve! A balanced portfolio, a balanced life, a balanced relationship…
I advocate that you try to be UNbalanced! Focus on one thing at a time with all of your energy. Run headling into danger whenever you need to take big risks.
I think the biggest thing holding most people back from being great is a lack of focus. Hmmm, you may have just inspired today’s blog post.