Want To Be A Great Manager? Be A Good Leader!

By Rich Kozlovich

George Washington exemplified what great leadership means. In spite of all the laudatory comments about his military prowess you may read from so many - he wasn’t that great a general. Although he was a great horseman but didn’t know how to use cavalry properly. His military experiences before the Revolutionary War weren’t anything to jump up and down about - although I think an argument can be made he was a very good crisis manager.

Washington held the rank of Lt. Colonel - later Colonel - in the Virginia Militia and was sent to the Ohio Valley to deal with French intrusions. The Virginia colony in 1754 was huge, extending from the Atlantic Ocean to the Mississippi River. It encompassed all of what’s now Kentucky, most of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, so that’s why the Governor of Virginia sent Washington to the Ohio Valley. A small northern part of Ohio, Illinois and Indiana was owned by the colony of Connecticut.

Washington’s efforts against the French resulted in his surrender of Fort Necessity and retreat. This led to the British sending in an army under General Braddock who was defeated and killed leaving Washington in command, which the regular British officers resented. Of the 1,459 men in Braddock's expedition, 977 were wounded or killed—including sixty-three officers. Washington was lauded as a hero - well deserved - for saving what was left of that British army from complete destruction. During the retreat Washington had two horses shot out from under him and had bullet holes all through his uniform. A pattern of bravery and leadership that was demonstrated all through the Revolution. He was 23 years old.

But there were no victories tied to Washington’s military career.

So why was he chosen to be the Commander in Chief of the Continental Army? He was a member of the Continental Congress and when the colonies decided it was time to end their allegiance to King George III he wore his Virginia Militia uniform to every meeting of the Continental Congress from that time on, letting everyone know he wanted the job.

Washington was a weak tactician, but his strength of character held the army together, and his willingness to understand and accept where he was lacking and act on it was crucial. Which is why he accepted Baron Von Steuben, a foreigner who could neither speak nor understand English, to train his army - writing the Regulations for the Order and Discipline of the Troops of the United States, which was used by the Army until 1814 and impacted tactics in the 1846 Mexican War.

Just as he was willing to recognize his inability to property train his army in what was modern warfare of the day he also willingly accepted tactical advice from subordinates. Washington desperately wanted to defeat Clinton in New York, in spite of the fact it was clear he would have failed. It was the Marquis De Lafayette - 24 years old - who convinced him he couldn’t beat Clinton but if he marched south to Yorktown where Cornwallis was trapped - he could defeat Cornwallis.

He did both - listened to a subordinate and defeated Cornwallis - pretty much ending the war.

After the war the officers of the Continental Army were going to mount a second revolution against the Continental Congress over their lack of pay. Washington entered the room and everyone in the room went silent. He spoke for a while then paused and reached into his pocket saying: "Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country." That ended the affair. It's said there wasn't a dry eye in the house. At that point in time there wasn't another human being on the planet that could have entered that room and accomplished what Washington did.

So how does this translate into good management practices for businessmen?

First, it's important to know who you can rely on - in short - get to know your employees. Do you know the names of their children and spouse? Secondly - do you do one-on-ones? Third - are you interested in what your employees are doing daily? The big picture is important, but that big picture is made up of a lot of snapshots, and this might end up generating some sound information. None of that happens if we're unwilling to listen - respectfully - and often times this can lead to understanding where an employee has needs - and hopefully - wants support. But that doesn't mean adopting the philosophy "A warm body is better than no body at all".

It's my observation one of the worst qualities a manger can have is the inability to fire those who need to be fired. When that happens the manager fails the company, themselves, their fellow employees and the employee who needs to find a job he can do. And if this failure to fire goes on for years the employee's age may impact their ability to get another job when that necessary separation occurs. 

Being a good manager requires learning good leadership skills, and even those with natural leadership abilities need to be honing those qualities in order to be an effective leader.