Up the Organization: How to Stop the Corporation from Stifling People and Strangling Profits (J-B Warren Bennis Series)

best two-man team I ever saw started with the philosophy: Neither of us is very good, but our weaknesses (and strengths) may be compensating. Like yang and yin, man and wife.We expect to make a lot of mistakes, but we hope to have the courage to correct them no matter how silly we look in the process. If we do our best, split up the chores, check i

Also, the importance of the idea will be directly proportional to the amount of passionate opposition it stirs up. 2. If everybody drops dead from enthusiasm for your idea, it’s certainly minor and probably wrong.You may be telling them what they want to hear upstairs. And hot new ideas never come from up there.

Get to know your people. What they do well, what they enjoy doing, what their weaknesses and strengths are, and what they want and need to get from their job. And then try to create an organization around your people, not jam your people into those organization-chart rectangles. The only excuse for organization is to maximize the chance that each o

isn’t half the fun—it’s all the fun.

As it turned out, I later followed Bob’s advice and attended the leadership program at Cal Tech.

True leadership must be for the benefit of the followers, not the enrichment of the leaders. In combat, officers eat last.

A lesson very few have learned: If you want to approach the head of XYZ Corporation, call him cold. Tell him who you are and why you want to talk to him. A direct and uncomplicated relationship will follow. The common mistake is to

Townsend was the first true, modern corporate leader (def: one who manifests vision, integrity, and courage in a consistent pattern of behavior that inspires trust, motivation, and responsibility on the part of followers, who in turn become leaders themselves).

Compromise is usually bad. It should be a last resort. If two departments or divisions have a problem they can’t solve and it comes up to you, listen to both sides and then, unlike Solomon, pick one or the other. This places solid accountability on the winner to make it work.

A viable theory is the Peter Principle: “In a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence (the cream rises until it sours).” Peter’s corollary: “In time every post tends to be occupied by an employee who is incompetent to carry out its duties.” From The Peter Principle by Peter and Hull. New York: Morrow; 1969.