I recently learned that during the last ten or so years Saddam built over
forty 'palaces' at great expense to the welfare of the people of Iraq.
I recently learned that during the last ten years or so many, many CEO's
have been building personal fortunes (example: 20,000,000 pounds sterling)
for future 'personal palaces' within large multinational org's.
May one inquire the difference between them, when push comes to shove?
We all saw what happened when the tyrant was overthrown.
In a recent and learned 'paper' the story of Billy Budd was used to
Because a good friend has just been relieved of a 'leader' (sic) thug of a
few years standing (sic) I am writing this out. The company is a
multinational brand leader.
The story of Billy Budd concerned a simple young man on a sailing ship,
who was the victim of a lying superior, who fabricated a story that
wrongly implicated Billy Budd in a crime that resulted in the most severe
of punishments from the ship's captain. Bud was portrayed as a simple man
with a stammer, unable to express himself clearly. Most of his colleagues
loved him. When confronted by a lie, his only reaction was to hit the
person misrepresenting (my friend did not do this, being wiser and gentler
than dear, gentle and wise Billy;-)
On the surface that helpless behaviour occurring when all other avenues of
righting a wrong are blocked -- may seem like thuggery. But it is really
desperation brought upon by being overcome by a thug.
Thuggery can happen in many situations, but there seems a tendency, a
pattern for mediocre people - who, when they are assigned subordinates or
(truly) superior ability become frightened and use oppression and other
tools of thuggery. The routes to power and authority are often quite free
and open to such thugs. Mediocre people are often found in very high
places (Peter Principle).
Leadership, so called, is often no more than a suite of shallow
competencies, it is argued;-) and often delivered in a disjointed way in
relation to current need and future trend such that said 'mediocrity' is
replaced...(can see see the noose closing;-)...at some stakeholder
expense...nudge nudge, wink-wink.
In the most modern context of 'on demand business' (canned laughter in the
background, classy graphics in the foreground;-) thugs become agitated
when confronted by someone who has developed transferable abilities to
integrate, choreograph and compose the business masterclass from scattered
resources. The violence of the thug can be subtle, long lasting and
practised at a distance.
Some etymology from the authors, 'The word "thuggery' was first coined to
describe an association of professional people who strangled their
Can you think of an example of 'an association of professional people'
that would act in such a way?
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.