Four problematic leadership lessons from the life of Richard Nixon

I just finished reading a fascinating new biography of one of the most complex leaders of our century - Richard Nixon. (Being Nixon: A man divided). Not only was he a "man divided" between who he wanted to be and who he was, but he could never bring his divided self into alignment, and that was his ultimate downfall. It reminded me of many leaders who have imploded for the very same reasons. 

There are some lessons to be learned from the Nixon story for any in leadership.

First, he was essentially a man without true close friendships, and that left him without people who were willing to tell him the truth. It is a fatal flaw. Three weeks before he resigned, George Bush, the senior, wrote a perceptive letter to his four sons in which he said this about Nixon. "He has enormous hang-ups. He is unable to get close to people. It's almost as if he's afraid to be reamed in some way - people who respect him and want to be his friends get only so close - and then it is clear - no more (p. 520)." The first time Nixon shook Haldeman's hand was the day Haldeman resigned! In addition, if you listen to the Nixon tapes, it is clear that those around him, with very few exceptions, did not tell him the truth but what he wanted to hear. 

Leaders who don't forge close friendships with others eventually get themselves into trouble. Nixon's presidency was called the "imperial presidency." Leaders can become "imperial leaders" when they shut out other people.

Second, Nixon "resisted self-analysis." He told Frank Gannon that "I've never believed that any individual can analyze themselves (p. 529). In some senses, this is a true statement which is why deep and meaningful friendships are so important. But at the same time, this lack of self-analysis kept him from learning the hard lessons that suffering and setbacks can bring. Rather than learn from them, he plunged headlong into even greater leadership stupidity, lies, and scheming. "Nixon's tragedy was that he did not gain wisdom, at least about himself, from suffering - certainly, not until it was too late to save his presidency (p. 530)."  

Third, Nixon, when he was in a reflective mood, and especially when facing adversity, would know who he wanted to be but was unable to translate that view of himself into reality. At the end of his first year in office, he wrote one of a series of lists about who he wanted to be: "Excitement - joy in the job - sharing, lift the spirit of people, Pithy, Brevity, Statesmanship, Honesty, Candor, Consideration for subordinates, Concern for people, Vitality and so on (p. 245)." Yet these were the opposite of who he usually was, as evidenced by the Nixon Tapes, and he was not able to integrate his desired self into his real self. 

This is why leaders get into trouble. They focus so much on their leadership and too little on their personal lives, which directly impacts their leadership. The very things that brought this brilliant leader down were issues that emanated from his inner life, where he was unable to tame the demons that haunted him.

Fourth, Nixon was deeply insecure, and that insecurity drove him to resist close friendships, hear or deliver bad news, and caused him to divide people into those who were on his side and those who were not. With Nixon and other leaders I have met, people were either friends or enemies.

Insecurity is one of the most vicious enemies of good leadership. It is why I have chosen to live by the value that I have nothing to prove and nothing to lose, and nothing to hide. When we are putting our energy into proving our worth, proving we are right, and guarding our pride, we say and do things that are destructive. Ultimately insecurity is about our own pride and lack of humility.

What struck me about this book is that any of us are vulnerable to these four leadership issues. It is also why I believe that the inner life of a leader is of so much importance. It is our inner lives that make or break our leadership. Whatever is inside is what flows into our leadership decisions, attitudes, thinking, and values. 

I do not take anything away from what Nixon accomplished, but ultimately his accomplishments are overshadowed by his untamed demons.

At Addington Consulting,

We Simplify Complexity

Speak Candidly

Help You Find a Way Through

tjaddington@gmail.com

Women and girls endure unspeakable horrors during war according to Human Rights Watch

JULY 10, 2015

Women and Girls Endure Unspeakable Horrors During War and the UN isn't Doing Enough About it

Are you bored?

Boredom happens when we have accomplished what we set out to accomplish, and there is, therefore, either margin in our lives or a sense that we have done what God had for us. In other words, it is an indicator that we need to be looking for what God has for us in the "next season." Sometimes we find ourselves bored and unfulfilled without even realizing it until someone around us points it out.

That does not necessarily mean a different job. But it probably means a different focus. We either respond to symptoms of boredom by settling for what is, or we actively ask the question, what does God have next?

I spoke with a leader yesterday who has been through a period of years that were hard but necessary. But he knows that the season is over and it is time to move forward, and the question was, "What is the God-sized task that I can give myself to in the next five years?" His job is not changing, but his focus is.

Whenever we refocus, we want to keep in mind what it is that energizes us and gives us the most joy - the lane God made us for. That is where we will be the most productive and receive the greatest satisfaction. The closer we get to that place, the more effective we will be. There are certain seasons when we need to pay attention to things outside our areas of strength, but when we refocus, it should always be in line with who God made us to be.

If you were to refocus your attention and to do so around your areas of greatest gifting, here are two questions to consider. One, what is the God-sized "ask" and "task" for the next season? Two, how do I rearrange life so that I can go after it? Those who ask these questions find themselves with greater satisfaction and greater effectiveness.

At Addington Consulting,

We Simplify Complexity

Speak Candidly

Help You Find a Way Through

tjaddington@gmail.com

When not to write new organizational policies

In my experience, organizations often have too many policies and policies that reflect a general distrust of staff. It is always interesting to read the policies of organizations that I am helping because they usually give me insight into the problems that they have had in the past (solved, of course, by a new policy) and the general level of trust and empowerment in the organization, often low.

Here is something to remember. Policies reflect an organization's culture but do not create culture. People create culture, and policies reflect whatever culture is created. While policies are obligatory for any organization, how and why they are written sends a message to staff.

Here are some reasons not to write new policies.

One: Someone has done something dumb (It happens)! The answer is not to write a new policy but to deal with the individual who has crossed a line. It is unfair to other staff to establish policies based on one individual's bad choices. No policy can keep people from doing dumb things. Deal with the individual rather than write a new policy.

Two: You want to deal with an issue of organizational culture. The culture of organizations is a matter of leadership rather than of policy. I can create a culture that avoids gossip, but I cannot write a policy to do the same. Some issues are issues of leadership and modeling rather than of policy.

Three: You feel a need to control what people do and do not do. If we have a need to control people, we are either poor leaders or have hired poor staff. Mostly it is the former rather than the latter. The longer a policy manual, the more there is usually a desire to control rather than empower. 

In our organization, there are periodic issues that remind us that we need to clarify issues with our far-flung staff. What we rarely do is write a new policy. Rather, we create a dialogue on the issues so that they filter through the organization. For us, it is about creating a healthy culture with healthy leaders, staff, and teams. Only when necessary do we write a new policy.

Always remember that policies reflect culture. They do not, in themselves, create culture. It might be instructive for all of us who lead to have an outsider read our policies and give us feedback as to what they see. In one church I consulted with, I suggested that their policies reflected a great distrust of support staff. Reading them through that lens, they agreed with me. They had used policies to do all three of the above-named issues rather than simply spell out their non-negotiables and commitments. 

At Addington Consulting,

We Simplify Complexity

Speak Candidly

Help You Find a Way Through

tjaddington@gmail.com

An interesting view of the challenge of mega churches

Tullian's tragedy: How the megachurch business model is failing everyone, including pastors

Posted from Oakdale, MN

All of T.J. Addington's books including his latest, Deep Influence,  are available from the author for the lowest prices and a $2.00 per book discount on orders of ten or more.

What real values underlie your ministry and can you name them?

All ministries operate out of a sense of values, either stated or non-stated. The best ministries have a clear set of values that everyone knows and lives by. Most ministries have a written set of values that no one knows and few live by. Which describes your ministry?

I often interact with church staff and leaders and ask them this question: "What values underlie your ministry?" In most cases I am told that there are a set of values somewhere but they would need to look them up. That is an "Ah Ha" moment for me as it indicates that whatever values are written down, they do not impact the ministry in the least.

Values matter - a great deal. When there is not a set of values all are committed to, everyone lives by their own set of values. In other words, there are competing and disparate sets of values rather than a set of values that unites. One of the most critical jobs of a leader is to establish values that undergird everything the ministry does. Often leaders do not do the hard work of clarifying values which leads to competing values. 

Competing values lead to competing agendas which leads to conflict and misunderstanding. Do you have a set of values that all in your organization subscribe to? If not you have competing values and it will lead to chaos over alignment.

Posted from Oakdale, MN

All of T.J. Addington's books including his latest, Deep Influence,  are available from the author for the lowest prices and a $2.00 per book discount on orders of ten or more.

No ministry stands alone

Ministries love to start new initiatives. Unfortunately many of these initiatives do not contribute to the mission of the organization whether church or other non-profit. This is also true in mission organizations where it seems that any idea is a good idea as long as there is someone to champion it. I disagree! When we say that no ministry stands alone it means that all strategies must contribute to the whole and anything that does not contribute to the whole does not belong! 

In fact, when ministries stand alone, apart from the overall mission of the ministry, it is wasted energy (even if it does some good) because it does not contribute to the whole. This is why, for instance, in our organization, anything that does not contribute to our overall mission of multiplying transformational churches among all people is not a viable ministry - for us. It is not that it might not be valuable for others but it is not our mission and does not contribute to what God has called us to do. We are exceedingly wholistic as a mission agency but everything must be connected to our overall goal.

This is where an emphasis on programs gets in the way of the mission. It is easy to start programs but often those programs do not contribute to what we believe we have been called to do. This is why both mission agencies and churches end up with siloed programs and ministries which do not contribute to the overall mission of the organization - if they have one.

In my view, no ministry should stand alone - apart from the mission of the organization and if those who promote it cannot show how it contributes in a meaningful way to the whole it should not happen. Especially if one desires to build a cohesive, aligned ministry where all the arrows point in the same direction. In our organization (ReachGlobal) it does not happen. Yours?

Posted from Oakdale, MN

All of T.J. Addington's books including his latest, Deep Influence,  are available from the author for the lowest prices and a $2.00 per book discount on orders of ten or more.