The BBC has published some life lessons worth learning from Boadicea – One of them is that a well-trained and well-equipped team is better than simply having a large workforce (e.g. her huge army did not overpower the disciplined Romans).
Have you learnt any other useful work tips from historical figures?
I am a little surprised at the reaction to my suggestion of St Benedict's Rule of Leadership.
Would I have caused the same reaction in this discussion had I chosen Sun Tzu's 'The Art of War'?
The way I read Victoria's comment was which historical figure have you (ie: me personally) learnt something from. For me it was when I was given a book on The Benedictine Rule of Leadership as a joke present when I started my MBA - and it was the single most useful thing I read over the whole course of my studies. Having a strong, personal academic base, the provenance of information is important to me. The main author, Dr Craig S Galbraith, is well respected in his field. He is a professor of technology, entrepreneurship, and corporate strategy, with a PhD in strategic management and mathematical economics and an MBA in manufacturing management.
Before continuing, I am not Catholic nor do I have any leaning towards other religions; I did say 'get past the religious aspects' in my posting. However when I flicked through this book a couple of the headings stood out, leading me to read the whole book. It made sense.
The Rules deal almost exclusively with the internal workings of organisations. It focuses on proper management, motivation, and organisation of daily work as well as the most basic, universal principle of leadership. There's too much to go into here, but St Benedict proposed things that we now take for granted but, more importantly, shows how these can be achieved. I can't imagine anyone beyond the most dictatorial dictator (nice alliteration there...) arguing against things like:
Yes, in something that's 1,500 years old there is a bit of 'just be selective about the bits that fit', but isn't that true of life in general? How many people have given or received cash payment or goods in kind for a job? HMRC rules say that this should be declared, but have you for the £5 the old lady next door gave you for cutting the grass? And 'little or nothing being a valid example or comparison now' reminds me of the scene in Life of Brian where it's asked: "What have the Romans ever done for us?".
It is presumptuous of us to act as if leadership philosophy was born after the start of the 20th century.
I think we fundamentally mislead ourselves when we seek to "justify" any "management" philosophy (or theology) by comparing similar resolutions utilised in widely dis-similar circumstances as indicating universal answers (or truths).
The Rules of St Benedict (RSB) made an ultimately impractical and hierarchical philosophy workable, yet the fundamental pattern of "one leader" who is served by layers of subordinate practice is the real constant, whether that "leader" is a deity, the People and Senate of Rome, or the Shareholders of a corporate entity such as a Plc.
The practicalities involved then being determined by the function of the entity, whether that be teaching the production of food, clothing, accommodation etc, for a monastic brotherhood; training to fight as an organised unit, build roads to facilitate the logistics of warfare and empire, or the education and qualification necessary to plan, organise and action today's 24/7 international trade.
Thus while it is completely true that leadership was not created in the 20th century, neither is it true to suggest that RSB, Roman empire-building, or hierarchical governance of business, offers or adds anything unique to the wisdom of the ages.
What is far more significant is the comparison of hierarchical structures (even those pretending to be egalitarian) with the real driving factors behind human behaviour. The truth of which is that we, like every living organism capable of mobility, follow two even simpler "rules".
We move away from harm, and toward advantage.
We can therefore be "governed" either by threat (the slave-driver's lash, the disapproval of our abbot (and through him, God), or our appointed "manager's" potential for dismissal if we do not do as we are told.... Or by the "leader" who offers us advantages (Heaven; guaranteed Roman citizenship, or financial/social reward) if we follow them, "sharing" their interest in building and maintaining the monastery, expanding the empire, or increasing the corporate share price. (None of which objectives "directly" advantage us at all)!
The RSB ensured that monasticism was viable; just as did the organised fighting practices (and roadbuilding skills) of the Romans, and as do the ACAS Code and Employment laws or Rules of Corporate Governance ensure business viability today.
The patterns may be replicated, but they create no "universal truths" by that replication, and by seeking to endow such truths by distortion of their contexts of application we serve nothing but our own agendas, whatever they may be.
Just as in the 1970's the management of our major industries tried to distort the context of dwindling resources and increasing overseas competition to maintain the doctrine of elitist and hierarchical capitalist management of those businesses in the face of reality.
Today's worker is empowered by education, mobility, and our social structures to defy "Rule" by the treat of "force majeure" and instead seek "Satisfaction" of both their employment and social needs; this requiring a "shared interest" in what they do, rather than being forced to obedience of hierarchy, be that expressed as ordained in theology or philosophy, appointed by rank or status, or bought as investment or payment.
Thus the RSB, (or anyone else's Rules), implying as they do that harm will result from their disobedience, are no longer the whole, or even the primary, avenue to obedient efficiency; instead genuine "leadership", resulting in the following towards often dissimilar objectives from the sharing of a path providing mutual satisfactions "en route" is now both requisite and (far) more effective in terms of providing motivation, efficiency and engagement.
While that mechanism also has been around for millennia, it is only in today's widening context of social enfranchisement, education, empowerment and legally protective welfare and employment rights that it has become essential.
…..A lesson many business managements seemingly have yet to learn!
P
