Unveiling the Silver Lining: How Bad Managers Serve as Amazing Catalysts in the Leadership Odyssey

Corporate Values vs Company Profitability

In the course of my professional journey, I've had the privilege of working closely with numerous managers and with leaders. Each manager uniquely reflects their spirit and character in their approach to business.

As a young professional, I'd spent years contemplating the best qualities of leaders, aiming to blend them with my own management style. A significant realization, albeit belated, dawned on me: focusing not only on the qualities of good leaders but also on those with both good and terrible management skills can profoundly alter one's perspective. Through personal experience, I assert that encountering a terrible manager/person can yield more positive added value than expected.

As a person who perpetually views the glass as half full and adheres to the principle of positive thinking, I posit that bad experiences are as pivotal as good ones in the journey toward leadership, particularly for young professionals. Learning what to do and how to be inspired from good leaders is essential, but equally crucial is discerning what not to do and how not to do it from bad managers. The adage "one bad experience is better than a thousand good ones" underscores the belief that seemingly negative experiences contribute to valuable decisions in the future.

Bitter experiences are integral to our personal and professional development, shaping who we become.

In the organizations where I've worked, I've received numerous trainings from esteemed professionals. While these trainings imparted valuable insights into what to do and how to act, there was a conspicuous absence of discussions on what to avoid, how not to be, and the potential consequences. This short article, penned for aspiring young management candidates, seeks to bridge this gap by humbly addressing both the ideal and less-than-ideal aspects of leadership and focusing more with regards what not to do or be and how not to behave.

Manager (not leader) profiles often fall into categories like administrators with a short-term vision, rule-oriented individuals, focusing on the system, control-freak minded professionals, paranoid about being careful and those obsessed with power. Training programs frequently emphasize these definitions, even employing color segmentation and character analyses. (An additional note: These classifications of people by color always seem to me like astrological signs. You don't lead with clusters, colors, zodiac signs, you approach and touch each person from a different angle. Saying that green is social, blue is detail-oriented, Taurus is stubborn, Pisces is emotional always hangs in the air. They are individuals. What is essential is personalized leadership.)

A good leader, in contrast, draws strength from character, relies on people for success, prioritizes doing the right things over doing things right, and possesses an innovative, long-term vision guided by values, ultimately focusing on people and most importantly inspire people to grow with their own talents for the best of the organizations.

While the distinctions between a manager and a leader often revolve around these characteristics, complications arise when evaluating company results.

This is exactly the point where the things are getting interesting and complicated, please keep following.

The so-called success of a terrible manager or person may hide their true bad color of that manager in the eyes of the board members who appointed them.

It is crucial to clarify that a single success does not set a lasting precedent. When company culture and values are disregarded, Machiavellian tactics may yield short-term success but inevitably lead to all types of manipulation, power greed, and catastrophic collapse. It's crucial to bear in mind that the concept of "short term" is relative; in certain contexts, a span of 10-20 years qualifies as short term.

You may consider that these terrible managers deserve to be leader in the organization one way or another and there must be beyond what we see if there is a success. Maybe it is simpler than that when we see history or even now and terrible leaders who led their nations into rubbles with meaningless wars or company leaders that led their companies bankrupt after many successful years in a row.

Did some dictators as well have great successes in some areas if you wish to call them as success and if you wish to call them as leaders? Were they not also seen as leaders for their nations or for their own companies, at least for a while?

 In a company where there are no values, results only serve the role of ruthlessly honing arrogance and ambition. And arrogance is the ideal set of emotions to blind a manager.

The applause band around you, which only voices what you want to listen to, approves everything that is said for the sake of their own small interests in their own little worlds, vilifies their teammates for their own seats and glorifies their leaders at every opportunity, are the biggest wood carriers of this arrogance fireplace.

And let’s delve into the worst shape of leadership: Narcissism. It's time to outline the characteristics of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) in management:

• Narcissists resist accepting criticism.
• They attribute all success solely to themselves, and in the face of failure, they consistently seek out and assign blame to a scapegoat.
• Loyalty for narcissists is exclusive to themselves; they are not devoted to any organization, person, or entity they work for.
• Mastery of manipulation is a hallmark of narcissistic behavior.
• The narcissist's objective is initially to undermine the self-confidence of others, employing a double-blind tactic until the individual becomes obligated to them.
• Narcissists are willing to engage in any action or spread falsehoods for personal gain.
• They exploit people for their short- and medium-term advantages.
• They have no fear of fraudulent activities or figure manipulaton if they see as it should be their own or if they think they deserve.
• Narcissists view themselves as superior to others.
• The need to be right in every argument is a consistent trait.
• Praise, applause, and flattery are essential for narcissists, akin to a baby requiring nourishment every two hours. They deliberately surround themselves with individuals who fulfill this need.
• Establishing an environment of pressure and absolute control is a common strategy.
• A facade of high self-confidence is maintained by wearing a metaphorical mask.
• A notable lack of empathy characterizes narcissists.
• Narcissists harbor limitless desires and passions.
• Perpetual victimhood is a common narrative for them.
• Open and conscious lying, along with denial of their statements, is commonplace.
• Tactics such as Love Bombing, Gaslighting, and Ghosting, frequently employed in their private lives, extend to their conduct within the organizations they work for.

You can search for the most prominent characteristics of narcissists or the most prominent tactics used by narcissists in any search engine, you will always get similar results.

Sound any familiar?

On the other hand, as a curious person in psychology, I learned a while ago that narcissists are actually little insecure children who try to position themselves in society as individuals with high self-esteem.

In fact, when it comes to the causes of narcissism, professionals say that there is a lack of love, care and communication in their childhood, and if narcissism is at a high level, there is an absolute childhood trauma that has not been overcome and has not undergone a treatment process. So let's leave that issue here, but to keep that always in mind what you might deal with. You might deal with a child, not a grown-up.

So how many of the listed characteristics do we have or how many of them are present in managers we don't like at all?

How can we fight to prevent us from having these characteristics?

Is it the example of the good, the finger pointing at the bad, or the bitter experiences that lead to leadership?

The most critical question for international groups or local boards in a nutshell is, are results important after achieving your values, or are results important in spite of your values?

Let's make the example even harsher:

If a sexist, discriminatory, fascist, psychopathic manager increases the company's profit by 1000%, is that fine with the board or any international groups?

If that person increases production by a hundred times in a very short time, is that person an acceptable naughty kid for you?

Although the answers to these questions are simple when it is heard for the first time, we see in many areas of life that this is not the case in practice and it is much more complicated than that.

So, "think global act local" slogan should transform into "think global act local with shared group values".

We have seen and witnessed many examples like so called legends of the market left their companies in rubbles after they left or like so called great leaders manipulating figures to maximize or optimize their profitability playing hide and seek with regulators and their BoDs or playing other games I'm reluctant to share. And in insurance market, rest assured that there are many games and tricks. They had hidden agendas, nothing more.

It is not just about ethics and values, not just about good results, but an optimized combination of them for pursuit of sustainable success.

The understanding of leadership that I adopt is the leadership philosophy defined as Servant Leadership.

In essence;

• Valuing people,
• Listening effectively,
• Being honest and transparent,
• Being sincere,
• Asking powerful questions,
• Supporting and empowering people.

In fact, it is both simple and so difficult. Really difficult, but really worth trying for. The people who share the same dreams may make them come true. The team, your colleagues, your friends.

There is no sustainable success without values, there is no strategy without company culture. History shows us at every opportunity that organizations that depend on single people are not healthy. What keeps organizations afloat is that values, independent of people and results, form the foundation of the organization.

And the short-term interests, positions, titles, money etc should not prison your character or even harm your own personal values and more importantly your independence. Dependence should be solely to your organization and group, not to other hidden agenda.

Even if it is harder, it is crystal clear for me that it is preferable to be a student on the path of servant and ethical leadership than a teacher or a master on the wrong path in spite of whatever the result is.

What matters is how you play the game, not just winning. Keep in mind, you will be remembered by that.

With respect and regards,

Fatih Yildirim

#Reinsurance #Insurance #Claims #Legal #Recourse #PC #Liability #Marine #ClaimsCooperation #ClaimsControl #FollowtheFortune #FollowtheSettlement #Consultancy #ManagementConsultancy #Türkiye #Turkey #CFR #ClosedFileReview #SecondOpinion #Recourse #RecourseDetection #RecourseLeakage