[Vnbiz] Leadership -- A little more on Honesty

[AD Marshall]

On 7/29/07, ToanDucPham at GMail.com <toanducpham at gmail.com> wrote (copied from
below):
>
>
>    1. Would you, please, suggest for whom this wonderful List
>    of Ideal-Leader's Characteristics would be good?  For the leaders who are
>    trying to be better leaders?  Or for those who are trying to prepare to
>    become leaders?  Or both?
>
> Hi Toan,

As far as i remember, this thread is still led by the question "What
qualities would you like to see in a leader?" -- though it slipped under
another subject line when A Hoanh wanted to say more about honesty in
leadership.  I suppose answers to that question could be applied to "both",
current or aspiring leaders.

Re. your follow-up question:

     2.  Are you, each, truthfully applying the mentioned agreed-upon
> Characteristics in leading this Debate?


First, i don't remember any explicit consensus about any of the
characteristics listed so far being agreed upon by a majority of at least
those people posting to this thread.  As far as i know, there are still just
different peoples' lists floating about.  A couple summaries have been
synthesized and proposed, but i've not noticed any explicit, common or even
popular agreement yet.

In fact, i'd say the persistent lack of consensus in this thread is
interesting in itself.  Ever heard the expression, "Too many chiefs and not
enough Indians"?

As to applying any of the common qualities listed by the different posters
to this thread, personally, i've found myself almost subconsciously trying
to apply some of the characteristics listed, but with neither persistent nor
consistent intent.  Then again, i do not consider myself a leader, at least
not in the sense that leadership seems to be being discussed in this
thread.  Nor do i aspire to be such a leader.  I lead only myself and don't
claim to do even that spectacularly well.

You might then ask why i then bother with this thread.  I look at this
thread from the perspective of someone who has too often found himself
subject to others' leadership and, more often than not, found it a
cost-ineffective, frustrating, demeaning or ludicrous experience.  Since i
know i and most others will still likely have to be followers again, i
contribute the *desirable* leadership qualities i've suggested so far mainly
in hopes constructively disrupting what some call "common sense" when
talking of leadership.

I do that because, as far as i can see, some of the fundamental presumptions
most people have made (ie, "common sense") about leadership must be flawed.
If not, why would we still have so many powerful leaders leading us into so
many wars, imperial conquests, exploits of the poor, creation of victimless
crimes and criminals, corruption of officials and environmental calamities?
Why still, now?  We have had all the knowledge and technology we need to
solve the key problems of human over-population, over-consumption,
environmental degradation, famine, excessive income mis-distributions and
excessive human lust, greed, inconsiderateness and cruelty for a long time
already.  I'd suggest that, in general, globally, in governments, businesses
and non-governmental instiutions, our leaders' leadership has failed us and
we need to look at the fundamentals of what their leadership is based upon,
fundamentals they all too often conceal, consciously or not, as "common
sense".

Others posting to this thread will have to speak for themselves.

Finally, Toan, i found your two questions not only pithy and poignant but
somewhat pointed, too.  So, i'm curious as to whether or not you might have
some suggestions about how this thread might be better carried out.  If you
do, please do share them.

With warm regards,
Andi


On 7/29/07, ToanDucPham at GMail.com <toanducpham at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
>
> Dear Leadership-Debate Leaders:
> Some of my wonderings:
>
>    1. Would you, please, suggest for whom this wonderful List
>    of Ideal-Leader's Characteristics would be good?  For the leaders who are
>    trying to be better leaders?  Or for those who are trying to prepare to
>    become leaders?  Or both?
>    2. Are you, each, truthfully applying the mentioned agreed-upon
>    Characteristics in leading this Debate?
>
> Humbly,
> Em Toan.
>
>
>
>
> On 7/28/07, Tran Dinh Hoanh <tdhoanh at gmail.com > wrote:
>
> > [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Brother Phong,
> >
> > Ethics (morality) is one of the subject that may open for all kinds of
> > debates and arguments.  I have said in the previous message that our
> > definition of ethics may differ sometimes.  (But that is also true with
> > every thing else in the world).
> >
> > I think we should leave the debate on what exactly is ethical in some
> > specific circumtances for another time, otherwise we will be so much off the
> > original subject.  Let's us make note that there is a code of ethics for
> > lawyers which is enforced very seriously by the Bar and the Court.  No funny
> > business.  Just go to any website of any Bar Association in the US you will
> > find how serious the code of ethics is enforced.
> >
> > BTW, many corporations have code of business ethics also.  There is also
> > a code of ethics for doctors, accountants, engineers, etc.
> >
> > Have a great day!
> >
> > Hoanh
> >
> >
> > On 7/27/07, Hong-Phong_Pho at ita.doc.gov <Hong-Phong_Pho at ita.doc.gov >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > You cannot separate the leader from the system in which he leads.
> > >  In a system of transparency and check & balance, leaders can make as
> > > serious mistakes as anywhere else, but the effects of their mistakes are
> > > easier to contain and reversed.
> > > I knew I could get a rise (in this case two) out of anh Hoanh with the
> > > lawyer example.
> > > We all know that your chance of winning a case, even if you are
> > > guilty, improves greatly if you have a "good" lawyer, or better yet, a great
> > > team of lawyers.  And a "good" lawyer is one that wins.   Adhering strictly
> > > to the Code of Ethics and being ethical aren't necessarily the same thing.
> > >  How does the code of ethics address winning for a guilty client?  If it's
> > > the system's fault, not the lawyer's fault, then a lawyer who successfully
> > > defended an axe murderer is a good lawyer then?  One of the assumptions of
> > > the adversarial system is lawyers on both sides are equally capable.  HPP
> > >
> > > --
> > > Tran Dinh Hoanh, LLB, JD
> > > Washington DC
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > To subscribe/unsubscribe, please contact admins at
> > vnbizadmin at vietlinks.net
> > Info at http://mail.saigon.com/mailman/listinfo/vnbiz
> > Archive at
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vnbiz/
> > or http://groups-beta.google.com/group/VNBIZforum/
> > or http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe, please contact admins at
> vnbizadmin at vietlinks.net
> Info at http://mail.saigon.com/mailman/listinfo/vnbiz
> Archive at
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vnbiz/
> or http://groups-beta.google.com/group/VNBIZforum/
> or http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz/attachments/20070730/35c0d825/attachment.html