This post is In response to the following question:
As the heroic Capt. Richard Phillips reminded us when he offered himself to the pirates instead of his crew, sea captains, like all good leaders, are expected to sacrifice themselves and their personal interests to protect those under their command. What are other examples from other fields of endeavor of leaders who have succeeded or failed to live up to this obligation? What factors should leaders consider when deciding when and whether to make extraordinary personal sacrifices?
It is a long-standing naval tradition that the ship's captain is the last one to leave his ship when it is going down. That tradition is also evident in other professions in which a single person is responsible for the lives of many people, as was evident for the world to see and admire when Captain Sullenberg was the last person to leave his aircraft, walking the aisles twice to ensure that no passengers were left on board, after he brought US Airways flight 1549 onto the Hudson River in January of this year.
The expectation that the ship's captain, whether that be a sea-borne or air-borne ship, be willing to sacrifice their safety for the lives and safety of those under their charge, is an important part of the professional ethos of a number of much-admired professions. This sense of responsibility for the well being of those under one's charge is, however, fundamental to good leadership of any organization in time of fear, stress and uncertainty.
I see four ingredients to successful leadership when overcoming emergencies and challenges under stress and fear. Leaders must be able to credibly instill in their subordinates 1) a trust in the leader's competence to effectively deal with the threats to that the organization; 2) a belief in the leader's personal commitment to the welfare of the individuals in the group ("They don't care how much you know until they know how much you care.."); 3) a sense that all members of the group, including the leader, share in the risk and sacrifice required to overcome the threat, and; 4) knowledge that families and loved ones will be taken care of if the worst happens.
Captain Phillips clearly demonstrated 1, 2, and 3, and it appeared from news reports that representatives of Maersk Lines were actively engaged with the family of Captain Phillips, taking care of that fourth ingredient.
By his willingness to give himself up as a hostage to the Somali pirates, Captain Phillips was certainly aware that he was subordinating his loyalty to his family, friends, and Vermont community to his loyalty to his crew and the demands of his profession. But that is part of the ethic of his profession, as it is in the military, police, and other professions. I assume that Capt Phillips was subconsciously acting on a priority of loyalties, and personal welfare was clearly not at the top of that list. By his willingness to make that sacrifice, he also enhanced the stature of his family and community, and so in that sense, his selfless action was also an act of loyalty to those other groups who could conceivably have suffered from his action. Any profession or organization that has an expectation that one be ready to make significant personal sacrifice, has to include provisions for taking care of family and community, whenever that sacrifice becomes necessary.
Most discussions of loyalty focus on the loyalty expected of the individual to the organization and its leaders. Loyalty however is a two-way street - and Captain Phillips clearly demonstrated loyalty to the people under his command and for whom he clearly felt responsible. Many corporate leaders have been very loyal to the people they have served as leaders, and done all that they could to competently lead, take care of people, share sacrifice, and take care of families during the stress of the current economic crisis. They are hopefully rewarded with strong bonds of trust and loyalty, not only from their employees, but also from the extended families, friends, and communities of those employees, and ideally also with the patronage of current and future customers.
On the other hand, the press has also made us aware of many other corporate leaders who have taken their money and run, leaving their "ship's crew" adrift, to struggle and deal alone with the downturn in the economy. Though these corporate leaders may never have to worry about where their next meal is coming from, or whether they can make the next payment on their yacht, they will never know the joys of being in an organization with a strong ethic of loyalty, mutual commitment, and shared sacrifice, and may learn only too late, that indeed, loyalty is a two-way street.
Posted by: LillyEvans | April 15, 2009 2:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: LillyEvans | April 15, 2009 2:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: RedBird27 | April 14, 2009 5:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.