The World Economic Forum’s 2015 Survey on the Global Agenda revealed that 86% of respondents perceive a global crisis in leadership. The survey assessed the general concerns and issues about leadership, not the specific issue of leadership during a crisis. That deficiency is more disconcerting in the face of increasing global social, political and economic complexities.
Donald Trump’s presidency has been described, by pundits and politicians at every gradation of the political spectrum, as being in a state of crisis. With an approval rating as low as 38.8% at one point (Gallup Poll, July 2017), many Americans share the same perspective. The investigation into Russian involvement in the presidential election is a Watergate level risk, to the stability of his administration. The escalating nuclear provocation from North Korea, pushing nations closer to the brink of catastrophic conflict, poses his greatest foreign policy challenge. Epic hurricanes, exacting with deadly, destructive and decimating force have become his spotlight test for a national emergency. The virulence of America’s racial virus, now disseminating at epidemic pace by those who perceive agency and alliance from the White House, is his contagion to remedy for national unity. Millions of Americans are facing the prospect of financial and physical ruination, as they stand in the crosshairs of his political reprisal targeting the Affordable Care Act. ISIS is still menacing, global warming is still threatening, immigration reform is still conflagrating and Trump is still tweeting.
Each of these circumstances is an example of a crisis --- a moment or situation of extreme dilemma, danger or disaster that requires complex, critical decision-making for resolution. Troubling to many people, across the country and around the world, is that President Trump acts more as Crisis-in-Chief, than Commander-in-Chief, creating or exacerbating such moments and situations almost daily. His temperament and conduct are causation for his crisis of leadership, which compound the very real and consequential crises that confront his judgment and the nation. Rather than respond and react with the critical thinking required of urgent stewardship that coalesces efforts and intentions, Trump’s petty, petulant, impulsive and inflammatory inclinations are Balkanizing his party, his country and the international community with perilous potential.
Political and business leaders, regardless of party affiliation, have a moral, ethical and yes, patriotic responsibility to challenge, counter and if need be contravene Trump’s direction of the nation’s affairs and fate. To do so will require courage and resolve to act with a collaborative civic motivation for the welfare and preservation of our form of government, and the people it has been chosen to represent. Even more, it will require what Trump seems to be either completely averse to or completely void of --- principle.
Principles are both the magnetizing elements and windrose that direct and display our moral and behavioral compass. They are conduct guides based on fundamental truths or foundational propositions. Leadership is dependent upon them because leadership provides direction. The ability to do so is not only evidence of character; it is also proof of adherence to principles. Without principles, direction becomes a perilous, heedless course.
When evaluating the character and leadership conduct displayed by President Trump, there appears to be no directional alignment to any fundamental truth or foundational proposition. Now our country is set for a course of heedless direction, on a path strewn with one crisis after another, some manufactured by President Trump and others the providence of forces beyond his control.
Are there guiding principles for leadership, in a crisis? Yes, but to understand and utilize them requires knowing and identifying the phases of a crisis:
1. The event threat: the actual cause and circumstance that is creating the extreme dilemma, danger or disaster.
2. The rate of manifestation: the amount of time, sudden v. slow, it takes for the threat event to become actual.
3. The factor of realization: the speed of awareness of the threat event --- surprise v. gradual.
4. The recognition-reaction interval: the duration between crisis awareness and action for resolution.
Leadership is behavior, so the principles for crisis leadership are behavioral guides to adhere to, during every phase of a crisis. They are not step-by-step instructions for crisis management, the specifics of which vary by crisis type. For example, steps taken to address the public relations crisis following the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill disaster differed from the response to the national security crisis created, when commercial airplanes unexpectedly flew into the World Trade Center. Instead, the principles listed below are philosophical guides (e.g.: The Golden Rule, noblesse oblige), that redefine the word “crisis” as a thought process for leadership conduct.
1. Composure sees through chaos.
Demeanor and decisions are hallmark and legacy of leadership in crisis, and the first has direct bearing on the second. Both are served well by calm. How you present yourself, to those who must execute your decisions, immediately imprints their organizational and administrative focus, resolve and implementation. How and what you decide as an action response will reveal the aptitude and attitude of your judgment. Astute analysis and assessment requires clarity, which comes when settling the dust storm of thoughts and emotions whipped up by the event threat. To do this:
· Know that you don’t know everything, and that you are not expected to. This applies to the real-time dynamics and resolution know-how of the threat event. Direct your mental effort towards acquiring information, familiarizing yourself with the expertise of your personnel and establishing open, frequent and shared communication between all parties involved.
· Dissect the crisis into impact components that will allow you and your team to parcel out the complex task of resolution according to departmental specialization, for a more rapid and effective response.
· Resource your team with all that is required for them to execute your decisions. This will give you confidence that you are optimizing the response potential, while assuring your team they are fully supported.
· Keep your messaging positive. Negativity feeds stress and fuels panic. Judgment is established by analyzing and never proven by criticizing. Your words and conduct must be evaluative, encouraging and empowering.
2. Reliability means accountability.
Harry S. Truman became the 33rd President of the United States, assuming office after the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt. His most pressing order of business was ending the global crisis that was World War II. A sign on his desk declared the guiding principle of his leadership: “The buck stops here.” He understood that responsibility for decisions made by him and his administration was his to personally acknowledge and accept, as a condition for holding office. This speaks to leadership accountability, the importance of which goes well beyond honorable conduct.
The ability to confront, manage, overcome and flourish beyond a crisis depends enormously on the single most sustaining aspect of human resolve, hope --- the emotional alignment to possibility. When people cannot see or envision any possibility out of catastrophic circumstance, perilous predicament or an oppressive existence they will become hopeless. That mental state is the single greatest impairment of the human spirit. Without resolve, there is no resolution for any crisis.
The possibility of overcoming a dilemma, danger or disaster is the end-game focus of a crisis. A leader must inspire others to believe that possibility is a reality in progress. The effectiveness of a leader’s inspiration is directly related to the degree of trust she/he conditions with others. Trust, in action, is the dependability of words and actions ---reliability. Being answerable to the outcomes of your words, decisions and actions is your obligation to those who must carry out your orders of execution. The conviction of your obligation measures the integrity of your character, and your character determines the degree of trust you earn.
Your failure to achieve trust and demonstrate reliability will risk undermining the confidence, motivation and cooperation of everyone you administer with a fallout culture of resentment, dissension and blame. To safeguard against this:
· Communicate clearly, convincingly and consistently.
· Act responsibly, committedly and truthfully.
· Support openly, earnestly and continuously.
3. Insight is foresight.
Time is the most critical resource during a crisis. Lives, fortunes and fate can be lost if it is not maximized. Reactive thinking occurs after an incident and indicates time passed. Proactive thinking occurs before an incident and anticipates time to come. In other words, in a crisis, if you’re not ahead, you’re already behind.
Anticipate and plan for worst case scenarios, potential events, and unseen probabilities. This will require insight --- the discernment of underlying truths and realities, in order to enable foresight --- a precautionary view of the future.
Insight is informed by experience and perspective. The more varied those sources are, the more discerning yours will be. Enlist people with different knowledge, concerns and viewpoints. Pool their collective scope, develop protocols for what will and could happen, and improve existing protocols to streamline execution for the most rapid response achievable.
This process was engaged by John F. Kennedy, during the Cuban Missile Crisis. A year and a half earlier, he suffered the most disastrous foreign policy decision he ever made, the Bay of Pigs invasion. So when Soviet nuclear missiles were discovered 90 miles from the U.S. mainland, he tried a different approach. Seeking to avoid the groupthink that undermined his decision making during the Bay of Pigs invasion, Kennedy ignored his military brass, who urged a military strike. With the fate of the planet and lives of 200 million at stake, a wrong decision meant a nuclear holocaust. Kennedy wanted a diplomatic resolution. He implemented a four-step approach, to come to his decision:
Step 1
Every member of the primary strategy team would function as a “skeptical generalist”, approaching the crisis holistically rather than subjectively from departmental perspectives.
Step 2
Meetings were convened away from the White House, in informal settings.
This eliminated the turf-battles and conversational impediments of official titles and ranks, and allowed for more unrestrained discourse.
Step 3
The primary strategy team was instructed to occasionally meet without the President, to safeguard against restricting solutions to his viewpoints. Kennedy, like Lincoln, believed that diverse views, candid debate, exhaustive examination and dissent were vital to critical evaluation.
Step 4
The primary strategy team would then divide into sub-groups that would each develop alternative solutions. The sub-groups would then reassemble and debate the attributes of each solution, and let the best plan emerge on its merits.
This four-step approach still serves the presidential decision-making process. It is also taught in universities and business schools across the country, as the gold standard for executive decision making. More simply stated:
1. Zoom out - Expand the view off assessment beyond the narrow focus of occupational expertise.
2. Liberate the debate - For more constructive collaboration, free discussions from the restrictive formality of pecking orders and protocols.
3. D.I.Y. - Do it yourselves. Members of the decision-making team should meet without the chair in attendance, to insure a more objective, innovative, uninhibited evaluation for solution.
4. Pick and choose - Within the decision-making team, action groups should form and develop multiple solutions, then present and challenge them to determine the best plan of action.
4. Solidarity beats a common threat.
Everyone called upon to address a crisis is instantly impacted by it. Effective response requires the most devoted and diligent scale of teamwork attainable. Everyone must be fully informed of the objectives sought; thoroughly convinced of the plan and procedures drafted; and completely committed to a task performance that not only achieves goals but supports everyone else in achieving theirs.
Recognize that as a leader, the people around you, from department heads to entry-level staffers, from established veterans to unproven trainees, are all your partners. To view them merely as assets or resources diminishes the value of their contributions, the dignity of their dedication and the worth of their humanity. Do this and you will become desensitized to the mental, physical, psychological and emotional toll the crisis is exacting on them personally. You will also become indifferent to the exhaustive, self-sacrificing efforts they are making at your behest. This will prove alienating and disruptive to the crisis response.
Empathize and you will energize. Interact with your partners, at all organizational levels, and you will:
· Solidify their loyalty with face-time appreciation.
· Personalize their value with eye-to-eye recognition.
· Assure them of your support with handshake confirmation.
· Fortify their bond with huddle-up cooperation.
Maintain transparency to shore up their trust. Keep open lines of communication to incorporate their feedback. Assess their condition to prove your concern. If people know you have a genuine interest in their existence, and a general regard for their well being they will deliver tirelessly, together. And only together will everyone prevail against the crisis.
5. Insist from yourself what you ask of others.
Hypocrisy is derelict duty to, and fraudulent assertion of principles. It undermines every institution, every organization and every enterprise. For the leader who exhibits it, hypocrisy will likewise undermine his/her leadership, and everyone under it.
Integrity is authentic adherence to, and avid application of principles. It strengthens every institution, every organization and every enterprise. For the leader who demonstrates it, integrity will likewise bolster her/his leadership, and everyone under it. This is the inherent meaning in “Talk the talk, walk the walk.” As a leader, particularly during a crisis, you must do as you speak.
Your words must have a single standard of judgment and a believability of purpose. Your decisions must address problems, without violating the rights and principles of the people executing and affected by them. Your actions will bear direct evidence of your character, beliefs, morals and ethics and when compared and contrasted to your words and decisions, that evidence will convict you of duplicity, or commend you as worthy of being followed. The importance of this will be evidenced by the performance of all you lead. If they do not believe in you, they will not believe in your professed regard for them, or what you ask them to do. Nothing will guarantee the failure of your leadership, and of the efforts you direct, more than this. In the words of Eleanor Roosevelt, “It is not fair to ask of others what you are not willing to do yourself.
Success is not an option, when it is a need.
When “must do”, “will do” and “make due” all mean the same thing, then failure is unthinkable. Were this not the thinking of Abraham Lincoln, the Union would have not survived. And had not Franklin Roosevelt thought the same, The Great Depression might have been our great end. When survivability is not an alternative, success is an imperative.
Resolving a crisis is a “must do” situation. This is the overriding task of leadership, in times of crisis. The resolve of one can be the will of many. A leader must embody and exemplify a resolve that galvanizes the “will do” effort of others, for a “make due” on their success.
If your primary mission is to “be right”, then your hubris will do wrong by the goal required, the backup of those you are counting on, and the comeback of everyone counting on you.
If your greater objective is to receive tributes and praise, you will run an even greater risk of failing, and being criticized and condemned for a pompous disregard for the safety, well being and lives of others.
Casualties, whether measured in property, belongings or lives are consequence to crisis. Every measure should be taken to minimize them. Don’t incur the debt of conscience, for the incalculable cost of invaluable losses that could have been avoided. When you have no choice but to succeed, eliminate all reasons to fail. In the aftermath of a crisis, how well you will be remembered will be determined by how well you led.
“The Contender”, starring Jeff Bridges and Joan Allen, was a movie about a political crisis looming over the White House. President Jackson Evans (Bridges) and Senator Laine Hanson (Allen) prevailed because of her stated conviction to a standard of conduct:
“Principles only mean something when they're not easy to stand by.”
That quote stands stronger in reality as a guide for behavior, than as moral idealism in fiction. Its verity is also echoed in history by the words of Thomas Jefferson:
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock.”