[Vnbiz] Leadership -- A little more on Honesty

[AD Marshall]

In fact, i thought your questions were timely and well-put.  I still think
they're well worth giving some hard, honest consideration and response.  So
i did, appropriately or not.  I don't see any need for you to apologize.
Sometimes being burnt (out) lets out stuff we would have otherwise have held
back even though it might actually be better let out.  I think that might
well be the case with your questions.

I don't think who anyone needs to personally know or have met other mailing
list members face-to-face to say what they think or feel about the texts
exchanged in a mailing list discussion.

Sorry, maybe i read your mail wrong.  Either way, your questions still seem
pithy (my intended meaning: brief, forceful, and meaningful in expression;
full of vigor, substance, or meaning) and poignant (keen or strong in mental
appeal).  Your reply below takes away what i meant by "pointed" (sharp or
piercing with hints of aggressiveness -- though i just learned
dictionary.com doesn't list any definition suggesting aggressiveness).

And please pardon my penchant for playing with words and using excessive
alliteration.  Bad habit, bad...

Cheers,
Andi

On 7/30/07, ToanDucPham at GMail.com <toanducpham at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
>
>
>
> Dear Anh Andi, other Leadership-Debate Leaders, and the rest of CACEs:
>
>    1. Sorry.  Very sorry.  (I broke my own rules).  I did not jump in
>    with a clear mind.  Just no sleeps for two nights.
>    2. Oh, Anh Andi.  No pithiness.  No poignancy.  No pointedness.  Not
>    at all.  I have not known you in person.  I have not known a lot of other
>    CACEs in person.  I saw once a photo of Anh Shane.  I saw once a photo of
>    anh Hong-Phong (from a local article about 6 years ago.)  I met Anh Hoanh
>    and Chi Tuy-Phuong once, in a gathering, for about two hours.  I know you
>    all too little.  It would be so illogical for me to be pithy, poignant, and
>    pointed.
>
> Rgds./Toan.
>
>
>
>
> > > Some of my wonderings:
>
>
> On 7/30/07, AD Marshall <admarshall at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 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:
> > 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20070730/6219e652/attachment-0001.html