Saad Hashmi’s Post

Here is yet another Edition about INTEGRITY AND LEADERSHIP from the YOLEF🥳🥳🥳

As we close out the first quarter, I wanted to share a list of the books I've had the pleasure of reading so far in 2024 Maybe there is a title, topic or author you might also find interesting or useful. 1. The Bible: Currently I'm reading in 1st Chronicles. In my 30's I began to try to read 3 to 4 chapters in the Bible a day. In so doing, someone can typically read through the Bible in one year. 2. The American Way of War: A History of United State Military Strategy and Policy by Russell F Wiegley (started in December 2023) 3. Lincoln's Mentors: The Education Of A Leader by Michael J Gerhardt 4. Embattled Rebel: Jefferson Davis and the Confederate Civil War by James McPherson 5. America's First Clash with Iran: The Tanker War 1987-88 by Lee Allen Zatarain 6. D.L. Moody On The Ten Commandments by Dwight Lyman Moody 7. Lennon, Dylan, Alice and Jesus: The Spiritual Biography of Rock N Roll by Greg Laurie 8. Lessons from the Mouse: A Guide for Applying Disney World's Secrets of Success to Your Organization, Your Career, and Your Life by Dennis Snow 9. Leadership In War: Essential Lessons From Those Who Made History by Andrew Roberts 10. The Churchill Factor: How One Man Made history by former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson 11 Legitimacy and Force: National and International Dimensions by Jeane J. Kirkpatrick 12. The Pursuit of Power: Technology, Armed Force and Society Since 1000 A.D. by William McNeill 13. The Unexpected President: The life and Times of Chester Arthur by Scott Greenberger 14. Impeached: The Trial of Andrew Johnson and The Fight for Lincoln's Legacy by David O Stewart Currently Reading: 3 books 1. The Bible: I'm currently reading in 1st Chronicles 2. Grant by Ron Chernow 3. Between War and Peace: How America Ends Its Wars by Matthew Moten

How often do you pay attention to the way you ask questions? This is one of the fundamentals of being a lawyer, But it applies across-the-board to any leader as well. The way you frame a question is going to demonstrate your level of confidence, Your expertise, Your grasp of the issues, Your willingness to learn, Along with your perception and belief in the person you’re asking. Who I was when I conducted depositions is not who I am as a leader, But my ability to establish my authority matters equally in both realms, (Though they may be opposite in nature). If you can’t establish exactly where you intend to go with your questions, You’re going to find it harder to move forward with your people. Understand what you want to learn before you ask, Be clear about why you want to learn it, And state this upfront. Confusion can cause people to question you or your perception of them. Here’s the bottom line when you are a leader: Preparation matters when you know something, It also matters when you don’t. “A problem well-stated is a problem half solved.” -Charles Kettering

This is a really important development to follow. It will be for the courts to determine which version is the most probable - but for all of us to consider is this: What should the consequences be when executives or executives together with board members, act to distort reporting to the board (or council )? Where do we draw the line? Is it ok to report only "the good news"? What are the consequences if the board do not have the benefit of the full picture? And what is the accountability for the distortion?

Check out the latest #Leadership Reverie blog post “Here lies one whose name was writ in water…”

Timeless advice from Winston Churchill: brevity sharpens clarity.

During World War II, Winston Churchill wrote a memo to his staff. The topic? The importance of brevity. "To do our work, we all have to read a mass of papers. Nearly all of them are far too long. This wastes time while energy is spent looking for the essential parts." Churchill's memo still resonates eighty years later. Everyone is busy, and everyone has too many emails to read. What a great reminder to be brief and direct. My favorite part of the memo is this observation: "the discipline of setting out the real points concisely will prove an aid to clearer thinking." If you like this post, please follow me (Nick Bullard) and click the 🔔 to get my next post.

Plato’s insights into tyranny and leadership are deeply rooted in his understanding of human nature and political systems. In Politeia, he outlined a cycle of government progression, where democracy devolves into tyranny.  Plato believed in a democracy, the inherent freedom and equality among people could lead to the rise of leaders who appeal to the masses through demagoguery and the promise of protection from real or imagined threats. Plato argued that a tyrant would emerge as a populist figure, claiming to defend the people against a collective enemy.  This leader would initially gain support by exploiting the people’s desire for security and stability. However, once in power, the tyrant would manipulate public sentiment by continuously presenting new conflicts or enemies, thus maintaining a state of fear and dependence. By focusing the public's attention on external threats, the tyrant diverts attention away from domestic issues, and his own potential misrule. The ongoing crises provide the tyrant with a pretext to consolidate power, often under the guise of emergency measures. A population in fear is more likely to accept the loss of freedoms and rights in exchange for the promise of safety and order. Plato’s analysis also touched on the role of rhetoric and persuasion in maintaining a tyrant's power.  He observed, that in Athens, the democratic assembly was often swayed by pathos, emotional appeals, rather than logos, facts or logical arguments.  This susceptibility to manipulation allowed leaders to control the collective will of the citizens, leading to decisions that were not always in the best interest of the state. Plato’s student, Aristotle, also contributed to this understanding by documenting how demagogues manipulated the Athenian people, leading to instability and conflict.  The historical record of these events, as described by Thucydides, shows the destructive potential of such leadership. Plato's statement about tyrants and war is a cautionary observation on the vulnerabilities of democratic systems.  It warned of the potential for charismatic leaders to exploit these vulnerabilities, leading to the erosion of freedoms, and the establishment of authoritarian rule.  His work encourages vigilance and critical thinking among citizens to prevent such outcomes. However, we have to accept the fact that people in large numbers are stupid. They are easily swayed by sentiment, not reality, justifying their cognitive biases. (Continued) Terence Nunis Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant Chief Executive Officer, Equinox GEMTZ

Plato’s insights into tyranny and leadership are deeply rooted in his understanding of human nature and political systems. In Politeia, he outlined a cycle of government progression, where democracy devolves into tyranny.  Plato believed in a democracy, the inherent freedom and equality among people could lead to the rise of leaders who appeal to the masses through demagoguery and the promise of protection from real or imagined threats. Plato argued that a tyrant would emerge as a populist figure, claiming to defend the people against a collective enemy.  This leader would initially gain support by exploiting the people’s desire for security and stability. However, once in power, the tyrant would manipulate public sentiment by continuously presenting new conflicts or enemies, thus maintaining a state of fear and dependence. By focusing the public's attention on external threats, the tyrant diverts attention away from domestic issues, and his own potential misrule. The ongoing crises provide the tyrant with a pretext to consolidate power, often under the guise of emergency measures. A population in fear is more likely to accept the loss of freedoms and rights in exchange for the promise of safety and order. Plato’s analysis also touched on the role of rhetoric and persuasion in maintaining a tyrant's power.  He observed, that in Athens, the democratic assembly was often swayed by pathos, emotional appeals, rather than logos, facts or logical arguments.  This susceptibility to manipulation allowed leaders to control the collective will of the citizens, leading to decisions that were not always in the best interest of the state. Plato’s student, Aristotle, also contributed to this understanding by documenting how demagogues manipulated the Athenian people, leading to instability and conflict.  The historical record of these events, as described by Thucydides, shows the destructive potential of such leadership. Plato's statement about tyrants and war is a cautionary observation on the vulnerabilities of democratic systems.  It warned of the potential for charismatic leaders to exploit these vulnerabilities, leading to the erosion of freedoms, and the establishment of authoritarian rule.  His work encourages vigilance and critical thinking among citizens to prevent such outcomes. However, we have to accept the fact that people in large numbers are stupid. They are easily swayed by sentiment, not reality, justifying their cognitive biases. (Continued) Terence Nunis Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant Chief Executive Officer, Equinox GEMTZ

Plato’s insights into tyranny and leadership are deeply rooted in his understanding of human nature and political systems. In Politeia, he outlined a cycle of government progression, where democracy devolves into tyranny.  Plato believed in a democracy, the inherent freedom and equality among people could lead to the rise of leaders who appeal to the masses through demagoguery and the promise of protection from real or imagined threats. Plato argued that a tyrant would emerge as a populist figure, claiming to defend the people against a collective enemy.  This leader would initially gain support by exploiting the people’s desire for security and stability. However, once in power, the tyrant would manipulate public sentiment by continuously presenting new conflicts or enemies, thus maintaining a state of fear and dependence. By focusing the public's attention on external threats, the tyrant diverts attention away from domestic issues, and his own potential misrule. The ongoing crises provide the tyrant with a pretext to consolidate power, often under the guise of emergency measures. A population in fear is more likely to accept the loss of freedoms and rights in exchange for the promise of safety and order. Plato’s analysis also touched on the role of rhetoric and persuasion in maintaining a tyrant's power.  He observed, that in Athens, the democratic assembly was often swayed by pathos, emotional appeals, rather than logos, facts or logical arguments.  This susceptibility to manipulation allowed leaders to control the collective will of the citizens, leading to decisions that were not always in the best interest of the state. Plato’s student, Aristotle, also contributed to this understanding by documenting how demagogues manipulated the Athenian people, leading to instability and conflict.  The historical record of these events, as described by Thucydides, shows the destructive potential of such leadership. Plato's statement about tyrants and war is a cautionary observation on the vulnerabilities of democratic systems.  It warned of the potential for charismatic leaders to exploit these vulnerabilities, leading to the erosion of freedoms, and the establishment of authoritarian rule.  His work encourages vigilance and critical thinking among citizens to prevent such outcomes. However, we have to accept the fact that people in large numbers are stupid. They are easily swayed by sentiment, not reality, justifying their cognitive biases. (Continued) Terence Nunis Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant Chief Executive Officer, Equinox GEMTZ