Baltimore
Sun 1/26/04
Questions:
Unstable setting breeds
pessimism in rats, study finds.
Rats living in an unstable environment are more pessimistic than those in secure and settled conditions, according British scientists – a conclusion that many humans with stressful jobs can appreciate.
Researchers at Bristol University Veterinary School kept one group of rates under unpredictable conditions, where light and dark cycles were temporarily reversed or their bedding was sometimes damp. The other group was kept in a stable, comfortable environment.
Scientist trained all the rats to press a lever when they heard a tone they associated with the arrival of food and to avoid pressing it when they heard a different tone associated with an unpleasant experience, such as a food shortage or a sudden, annoying noise. Then scientists played an intermediate tone to see how the rats reacted.
Rats from the group in unstable conditions were less likely to treat the intermediate tone as a positive sign than their more secure cousins. The researchers say the study shows that, like humans, anxious animals seem to be on the lookout for negative and threatening signals.
Four E’s ( a Jolly
Good Fellow)
By Jack Welch
Every time I speak to a group, I get asked about leadership. Mainly, people want to know how I feel about that age-old question: Are leaders born or made? And I always answer the same way: Who knows? What I do know is what leaders look and act like. Not because I’m a great thinker on the subject, but because I hired (and occasionally fired) leaders for about 30 years. After a while I got the hang of the characteristics that made some people better than others at setting the right goals, reaching them the right way, and doing both in the right amount of time, which is what leadership is when you get right down to it.
Now, leadership comes and goes as a hot topic, but it seems more and more on people’s minds these days because of the approaching presidential election. In fact, we can be pretty sure that the Democratic candidates will be assessed for their “leadership quotient” in every forum from TV to newspapers to bar stools and street corners. And more than that, Democratic voters I primaries states will have to pick which of the contenders is, in their view, the best leader of the lot.
I’m not going to do that here. First of all, I support George Bush; I happen to think he’s got all the right stuff, including the right character, and the right economic and national security policies. But at the risk of talking out of school-remember, I’ve never worked a day in government-I’m going to suggest a way for Democrats to evaluate their party’s candidates in terms of leadership. It’s a process I call the Four E’s, and it worked for me as long as I used it, more than 20 years. Some may say I should mind my own business, but if there’s a possibility the Four E’s might have some use in politics too, here’s a shot.
Basically, my process assesses four essential traits of leadership (each one starting with an E, a nice coincidence). One, successful leaders have tons of positive energy. They can go go go ; they love action and relish change. Two, they have the ability to energize others-they love people and can inspire them to move mountains when they have to. Three, they have edge, the courage to make tough yes-or-no decisions-no maybes. And finally, they can execute. They get the job done.
If a candidate for a leadership role has the four E’s, then you look for a final trait-passion. By that I mean a heartfelt, deep and authentic excitement about life and work. People with passion care-really care in their bones-about neighbors, employees, colleagues and friends winning. They love to learn and grow themselves, and they get a kick when the people around them do the same.
Passion, luckily, can’t be faked for very long, so this is usually a pretty easy call. Either people have a genuine zest for living and giving, or they’re just showing up.
Now, an important point. You absolutely cannot even start to think about the Four E’s until you get a solid yes on two questions. First: Does the leadership candidate have integrity? That means, does he or she tell the truth, take responsibility for past actions, admit mistakes and fix them? Does he demonstrate fairness, loyalty, goodness, compassion? Does she listen to others? Does he truly value human dignity and voice? These may seem like fuzzy, subjective questions, but you have to get a strong “AMEN” in your gut to all of them to even consider a person as a leader.
Second: Before applying the Four E’s, you have to ask, is the candidate intelligent? That doesn’t mean a leader must have read Kant and Shakespeare (if it did, I would have been out of a job). It does mean the candidate has to have the breadth of knowledge, from history to sciences, which allows him to lead other smart people in a world that is getting more complex by the minute. Further, a leader’s intelligence has to have a strong emotional component. He has to have high levels of self-awareness, maturity and self-control. She must be able to withstand the heat, handle setbacks and, when those lucky moments arise, enjoy success with equal parts of joy and humility. No doubt emotional intelligence is more rare than book smarts, but my experience says it is actually more important in the making of a leader. You just can’t ignore it.
OK, back to politics.
Just for an example, let’s use the Four E’s to look at the leadership potential of four Democrats, John Kerry, Wesley Clark, Howard Dean and Joe Lieberman.
John Kerry is easy. Without a doubt, he passes the two preliminary questions with flying colors-tons of integrity and intelligence. (His emotional intelligence, by the way, is what won in Iowa; it came through when he refused to lie down after being written off for dead.) How, consider the four E’s. He’s got energy-his prodigious work in the Senate and his stamina on the campaign trail prove that. And surely he must be strong on edge and execution-consider his two decades in the Senate. What supporters need to consider, than, is John Kerry’s ability to energize others, and his passion. I’m not saying anything new here. Pundits have long wondered out loud about Mr. Kerry’s “charisma” and his inner fire. Yes, they say, he’s thoughtful and earnest; but can he inspire others-millions of others, as president-to relentlessly pursue tough goals? Voters have to ask that, and perhaps in the coming months Mr. Kerry’s main job is to answer them convincingly.
Now Wesley Clark. On this one, let’s start with the Four E’s themselves. Gen. Clark appears to have them all. His 34-yar career in the military-as a leader in several high-powered roles-makes that case. But here, it seems to me, voters have to look at the first two questions and the passion thing before pulling the lever for him. Doubts about Gen. Clark’s integrity his “character”-have been raised by a few of his peers. I don’t know if these doubts are right, but the matter needs to be nailed down. Similarly, voters need to assess if Gen. Clark has the breadth of knowledge and passion about nonmilitary subjects to make him the right leader for this country. The job of president is so hard he’d better.
Moving on to Howard Dean, he passes the Four E’s, along with plenty of passion. And when it comes to integrity, I’ve seen nothing to suggest he hasn’t got it through and through. His emotional intelligence may be another matter. Not unlike a lot of strong-willed managers I’ve had to let go-even ones with all Four E’s-he seems to have some problems handling stress. In any big job, you get knocked off the horse a few times. It’s how you get back on that proves your real mettle. Voters evaluating Mr. Dean as a leader may do well to ask themselves if he has the ability to lead not just in good times, but in the bad times that any president is certain to encounter.
Finally, let’s consider Joe Lieberman. Here’s a man with more integrity and intelligence-in particular, emotional intelligence-than you can shake a stick at. What a terrific person! But when you evaluate him on the four E’s leadership questions arise. Does he have the “what, me sleep?” kind of energy it takes to run this country? And more pressingly, can he get others zealously excited about his causes? He is such a contemplative person, you have to feel concerned over his ability to show edge and to execute. The world is filled with gray, but great leaders are often forced to act as if it were black and white. Joe Lieberman, it turns out, may need to spend the next few months showing voters he is as much about action as he is about ideas.
Once again, I’m not campaigning for or against anyone with this article. Even though I admire the Democrats for their compassionate social agenda, I can’t stand their economic platform. It sucks incentive out of the system and could slow the economy and kill the job creation we’re on our way to seeing. But I’m enough of a realist to know that no matter who gets elected, at the end of the day, we all win if he can move this great country forward.
Only a real leader can do that.
Mr. Welch is a former chairman and CEO of General Electric Co.