Rudy Giuliani:

A leader who distances himself from his staff at the first sign of trouble might save a few popularity points, but it’s shortsighted. Eventually, no one wants to work for someone like that.

Here’s a good example of authoritarian leadership from Hans Finzel’s classic The Top Ten Mistakes Leaders Make.

The most important thing worth noting here is that the leaders weren’t being authoritarian on purpose. That’s the thing about authoritarian leadership: it’s often a subtle thing that someone doesn’t even know they are doing. This doesn’t excuse it, but it shows us that we need to be careful to reflect on our own leadership styles. For we can fall into an authoritarian approach sometimes without even knowing it.

Here’s the example that Finzel relates from one of his students:

My organization was looking for a new regional leader. Those making the decision had somebody picked out. However, before finalizing it, they were going to meet with different people to receive feedback on the individual they had chosen.

I gave them my serious concerns and observations. Even though they took the time to listen to us, they really didn’t hear what we were saying. In the end, our input and feedback was rejected. And our predictions came to pass.

How did this whole situation make us feel? We concluded that the leaders at the top had already made up their minds regarding their choice, and that, almost as an afterthought, they had decided to talk to us “underlings” to try to get our rubberstamp approval.

It made me feel as if they didn’t really want or need my input. If they would have listened to us, we would have been spared the pain, misunderstanding, and hurt when it became obvious to everyone that this individual was the wrong choice for leadership.

A helpful column by Jack Welch from a few years ago. Here are the six points, with some of Welch’s comments as well:

1. Preferred employers demonstrate a real commitment to continuous learning. No lip service. These companies invest in the development of their people through classes, training programs, off-site experiences, all sending the message that the organization is eager to facilitate a steady path to personal growth.
2. Preferred employers are meritocracies. Pay and promotions are tightly linked to performance. . . . People with brains, self-confidence, and competitive spirit are always attracted to such environments.
3. Preferred employers not only allow people to take risks but also celebrate those who do. And they don’t shoot those who try but fail. As with meritocracies, a culture of risk-taking attracts exactly the kind of creative, bold employees companies want and need in a global marketplace where innovation is the single best defense against unrelenting cost competition.
4. Preferred employers understand that what is good for society is also good for business.
5. Preferred employers keep their hiring standards tight.
6. Preferred companies are profitable and growing.

“The best thing about being a preferred employer is that it gets you good people, and this launches a virtuous cycle. The best team attracts the best team, and winning often leads to more winning.”

If you get this, you have almost everything you need to know. (Almost.) Tom Peters in In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America’s Best-Run Companies:

Any well-functioning organization is neither centralized nor decentralized but a wonderful combination of both. Around most dimensions the best companies, then and now, are loose. They give people exceptional freedom to do things their own way.

At the same time, the great companies are highly centralized around a few crucial dimensions: the central values that make up their culture, one or two (no more) top strategic priorities, and a few key financial indicators.

Note: The key point is not simply that organizations need to be centralized in some areas and decentralized in others. If you say to yourself “great, the fact that every organization ought to have certain non-negotiable realities means I should micromanage my people and tell them what to do in whatever area I want,” you’ve missed it.

The key point is exactly where a company should (and should not) be centralized. It should be centralized in its core values — they are not up for grabs and are not negotiable. It should be decentralized in relation to letting people find their own way to accomplish the objectives of their roles.

In other words, precisely because the mission and core values of an organization are specific and tightly defined, employees are able to have great freedom in almost every other area.

I know of some organizations that get this backwards — they stray in relation to their core values, but are tightly controlled according to the leader’s wishes in almost every other area. That’s backwards. The key to a great company is unleashing your people, which is possible from making your mission and values clear — and meaning it.