Thank you for another informative and thought-provoking article! I loved learning about the Gita and Arjuna’s struggles.
I can relate to this in my own way—not as a warrior or a political leader, but as an entrepreneur, a founder, and a CEO.
Regarding your note that "a calculation of self-gain should not enter into a leader’s decision-making," I wonder: can a good leader incorporate personal and organizational benefits into their decision-making while still striving to do good for the world? For example, if there is a decision that benefits the world in some sense but is not advantageous for my firm and its 30 employees, does it make sense to reconsider an approach that aims to benefit both my firm and the world?
Thanks, Brother, for your enthusiastic response. It always warms my heart to hear how you connect to these essays, just as it stimulates my thinking to consider the important questions you raise.
About my statement regarding leaders not calculating self gain, what I was getting at perhaps relates to one of the themes of the business literature classic, From Good to Great. The research informing that book indicated that leaders of highly successful firms were ambitious, but they were ambitious on behalf of the organization, not to advance their personal interests or gratify their egos. For sure, if a leaders’ organization thrived, they would likely earn a higher salary or the value of their corporate shares would rise, and they might garner more respect in the business community. But money and status were not the basis of their organizational decisions.
Perhaps, however, my statement was overly blunt and lacked nuance. In a small firm, there may be an intimate, even inseparable, connection between the gains of the firm and the gains of the founder. Maybe in such cases, the mindset of “win-win” is a better way to think about organizational decision-making. You want mutual benefits, I would imagine, for self, the firm, and the end-users.
Anyway, those are my first thoughts. Happy, of course, to talk further.
Thanks very much, Laure, for taking the time to read and comment. I really appreciate it! I’m so glad that you found the piece to be well done and also glad you found a line that held special resonance. Be well, Glen
Dear Brother,
Thank you for another informative and thought-provoking article! I loved learning about the Gita and Arjuna’s struggles.
I can relate to this in my own way—not as a warrior or a political leader, but as an entrepreneur, a founder, and a CEO.
Regarding your note that "a calculation of self-gain should not enter into a leader’s decision-making," I wonder: can a good leader incorporate personal and organizational benefits into their decision-making while still striving to do good for the world? For example, if there is a decision that benefits the world in some sense but is not advantageous for my firm and its 30 employees, does it make sense to reconsider an approach that aims to benefit both my firm and the world?
Thanks, Brother, for your enthusiastic response. It always warms my heart to hear how you connect to these essays, just as it stimulates my thinking to consider the important questions you raise.
About my statement regarding leaders not calculating self gain, what I was getting at perhaps relates to one of the themes of the business literature classic, From Good to Great. The research informing that book indicated that leaders of highly successful firms were ambitious, but they were ambitious on behalf of the organization, not to advance their personal interests or gratify their egos. For sure, if a leaders’ organization thrived, they would likely earn a higher salary or the value of their corporate shares would rise, and they might garner more respect in the business community. But money and status were not the basis of their organizational decisions.
Perhaps, however, my statement was overly blunt and lacked nuance. In a small firm, there may be an intimate, even inseparable, connection between the gains of the firm and the gains of the founder. Maybe in such cases, the mindset of “win-win” is a better way to think about organizational decision-making. You want mutual benefits, I would imagine, for self, the firm, and the end-users.
Anyway, those are my first thoughts. Happy, of course, to talk further.
This is so well done Glen, and quite interesting. One of my favorite lines: “But if this is love, love has no meaning.” Thank you!
Thanks very much, Laure, for taking the time to read and comment. I really appreciate it! I’m so glad that you found the piece to be well done and also glad you found a line that held special resonance. Be well, Glen