Thanks to Kevin Holland for his blog response to yesterday’s post. He is generally in agreement, but I couldn’t help repeat this quote:
You either want to be THIS, or you don’t. Before you decide that’s what you want to be, you’d better be aware of who you’re going to piss off, and you’d better be okay with it. Otherwise you might as well resign yourself to being whatever you are today.
Dude – don’t get me started. Who have I NOT pissed off, this week? As long as the overall picture is gains, not losses… : )
Good job, Maddie. We need more association professionals pissing people off. I’m serious.
That’s me — lowering the tone of the Blogoclump, one post at a time.
Hahaha – I just think you have to piss people off to get anything done in this association world – the trick is to do it while at the same time showing your sincere and heartfelt gratitude/empathy/etc for all the valuable contributions provided… : )
It has been my experience that association executives who successfully perform their jobs usually upset someone somewhere, since most IMOs often consist of a spider-web of individual interests, rather than wide-spread commitment to what’s best for the organizaton as a whole and the “higher” purpose of the association. So coping with someone who is upset is just part of the job description for association execs.
I wonder, however, if that is different from deliberately trying to “piss off” someone? Or taking enjoyment from doing so?
From time to time, I give talks on President Lincoln’s leadership, based on Doris Kearns Goodwin’s book, Team of Rivals (next talk is at the PMI Delaware Valley dinner meeting in November). I started this effort several years ago at the ASAE annual meeting where Ms Goodwin spoke as a keynoter.
One of the most characteristic aspects of Lincoln’s leadership in such troubled times, with “rivals” all about him, was his remarkable ability to rise about personal criticism/insult and to refrain from turning critics and competitors into enemies.
Goodwin maintains that Lincoln could absorb hurts and slights because he possessed “the longest possible view” through an unswerving commitment to purpose.
Just something to consider.
Amen, Virgil. Wise words, as usual. The “pissing people off” part is really about having the conviction to stand firmly behind who you are or what you are doing in the organization. But beneath taking a stand there is the respect, growth, and love that Tom Peters was talking about (that I referenced in an earlier post). In that post he actually used U.S. Grant as an example, pointing out that his nickname was “Unconditional Surrender” Grant, yet he was the only one of the senior Union officials who lifted his hat when passing the captured confederate leaders. Being in disagreement or conflict with someone (who might act “pissed off”) does not absolve you of your responsibilty to respect them.
Another interesting aspect of Lincoln’s leadership was that he apparently never used authority or coercion to achieve his goals. This is amazing to me, given that the stakes were the preservation or dissolution of the Union–a situation much more challenging than anything we association execs will ever face.
Lincoln was a good communicator and excellent story teller, and one whose steadfastness of purpose inspired others to overcome petty rivalries and help him achieve his goals.
It’s little wonder that more has been written about Lincoln than just about any other American.