Tag Archives: bullies

DON’T CONFUSE BULLIES WITH LEADERS

Posted on by
Reply

#leaders #bullies #leadership #success
Leaders don’t have to know everything.
They only have to know what they don’t know, find people who do know and create a space/atmosphere for them to do their best work.
A leader doesn’t have to be an expert in the company/agency he or she is leading. He or she has to make sure the people he or she is leading – the actual experts – have what they need to do their best work. The leader also may have to defend and support the work being done in the company or agency.
A leader also has to embrace the mission of the company/agency he or she is leading.
Bullies, on the other hand, do not lead. They tear things down. They denigrate the people within the company or agency. They don’t embrace the agency’s or company’s mission. In fact, they want the agency or company to do the opposite of what it is supposed to do.
Strong leaders don’t always show their strength. They often exercise strength behind the scenes, and always in an effort to help those they are leading.
Bullies want their “strength” on display. They often deploy their “strength” by acting against those whom they are supposed to lead. In such a situation, people usually get hurt and the company or agency crumbles.
Leaders know their success doesn’t come strictly on their efforts. They know it takes a team to pull off success, and are eager to credit that team with the success. If there are failures along the way, leaders take the blame themselves, and take responsibility for the repairs.
Bullies believe they are the only ones who can achieve success, and those under them merely do as they say. They credit no one but themselves for success, and only blame others for failures.
While the leaders work diligently to help others succeed, bullies work only to help others fail, so they can claim success.
Leaders lift people up. Bullies beat people down, to paraphrase a campaign theme from the recent U.S. election.
Bullies are skilled at breaking things. They are less skilled at building, or rebuilding, things.
Leaders try not to break anything, but, instead try to build or rebuild with existing structures, materials and people.
Indeed, some things must be torn down to rebuild. Bullies do that for sport. Leaders do that only when necessary, to try to save as much of what was there as possible.
Most of us have worked for leaders. Some of us have worked for bullies. If you are an aspiring leader working for a bully, you may have to cut your losses and find a leader(s) to work for. You’ll learn from a bully how not to be, and learn from a leader how to be.
The bully’s apparent “strength” hides overwhelming weakness. Over that so-called muscle is very thin skin.
Bullies have to look over their shoulders constantly, lest they be sabotaged. Leaders have to observe their teams constantly so they can learn more, support more and advocate more.
If you are put in charge of something, choose to be a leader. It’s safer for you and better for your organization.
In golf, the player lets the club do most, if not all, the work, while providing the best swing possible.  In leadership, the leader lets the team do most, if not all, the work, while providing the best atmosphere possible.

Peter

VIOLENCE CREATES MORE PROBLEMS THAN IT SOLVES

Posted on by

#viiolence #HittingBack #SolvingProblems #bullies #ChickenVsEgg
When we are hit, we usually want to hit back.
Sometimes, hitting back is necessary. In fact, we may have been taught as children that the best way to stop a bully is to fight back. The theory went that once the bully saw that you were gutsy enough to fight back, he or she would stop bullying.
Today, that doesn’t always work. Some bullies actually WANT you to hit back, because they believe they can show you to be the aggressor.
In some battles, the question of who started them can be illusive. The origins of a dispute can go back long before the actual violent incident.
Often, the origin of disputes becomes a chicken vs. egg question. Ironically, they can be irrelevant to the problem at hand. Or, long simmering grudges can be the crux of the problem at hand.
The point is that violence is unlikely to eliminate the dispute that caused it.
Why would someone commit violence if it doesn’t solve a problem?
Those who commit violence are often people with problems they cannot solve themselves. They feel put upon by someone, a group or something(s). They have no way out but to lash out.
Other times, those who commit violence let their emotions dictate their behavior. In human nature, that’s very easy to do. Committing violence makes the committer feel better, because his or her pent-up emotions have been released, albeit in a bad way.
Usually, they soon find out that their problems are not only unsolved, they are in even more of a pickle than they were before the violence. The good feelings of releasing pent-up emotions soon turn, well, sour.
Jealousy is another reason for violence. Someone has what you want, so you get it through violence.
That can work, at least if it is things that a person wants – until the perpetrator gets caught. Then, the problems begin anew.
If one commits violence over a person, like a jilted lover, he or she may not get that person back. In fact, it may cause the coveted person to resent the violent person even more.
This begs the age-old question. How does one solve problems without violence?
Talking certainly helps. Listening helps even more.
When there is both talking and listening, on all sides, agreements can be forged. Or, at least, decisions that violence will not solve the problem can be made.
So, the next time you feel aggrieved, by someone or something, stop. Think about how you are going to solve the problem. No matter how angry you may feel, know that expressing that anger through violence will only compound your grievance.
It’s much more easily said than done, of course. But, if one person can think first before acting on a grievance, there can be less violence in the world.
That one person could then become two etc. Better yet, those two can be on both sides of a dispute. When that occurs, resolved disputes abound.
Peter