Page 35 - Great Communication Secrets of Great Leaders

Ch01/P1_Baldoni_141496-7 5/22/03 12:27 PM Page 13
WHAT IS LEADERSHIP COMMUNICATIONS?
13
CHAPTER 1
his generals and aides, and while at times he did go too far, Churchill’s breadth
of knowledge lent him a greater degree of credibility in military matters.
One story among many illustrates Churchill’s insight as well as his will-
ingness to ferret out answers. Upon learning that regimental patches (a form
of military insignia) were no longer being issued to British troops, Churchill
investigated. The Army Office said that it was cooperating with the Board of
Trade, which had forbidden the patches as an unnecessary use of cloth. In real-
ity, the Board of Trade had no problem with the patches; the Army was mak-
ing excuses for its “wildly unpopular decision.” The real issue, as Churchill
understood, was not a patch of cloth; it was esprit de corps. British Tommies
identified with their regiments; to deprive them of this distinction would
adversely affect morale. The regimental patches returned. 10
Unlike lesser leaders, Churchill expected his generals to disagree with
him. He did not want yes men; he wanted commanders who could think and
11
plan for themselves. And this is why he had such fractious relationships with
his chiefs of staff. By repeatedly questioning their decision making, Churchill
assured himself, and by extension the British people, that their military strate-
gies were sound. Mistakes were made, of course, but Cohen believes that
Churchill’s hands-on approach, chiefly by virtue of his communications, was
the proper course. 12
LEADERSHIP OF PRAGMATISM
Churchill was a pragmatist. He was elected to Parliament as a member of the
Liberal party, and he was a minister in David Lloyd George’s cabinets before
and during the First World War. When the fortunes of the Liberals declined, he
declared for the Conservatives, his father’s party, and in the late 1920s became
chancellor of the exchequer, again something his father had been. His party
switch was opportunistic, of course, but it was born of his need to be in the
thick of the action, to be of service, to be doing something of value and merit.
As a result of his opportunism, he was widely disliked throughout his career
by those of his own class as well as by party loyalists. As his biographers point
out, it was his service as prime minister that endeared him to the people. Prior
to that, all too often he had been regarded more as a busybody, an opportunist,
and a self-promoter.
Contrary to his image as a tough leader, Churchill was repeatedly
kind to his adversaries once he had defeated them. He kept his predeces-
sor, Neville Chamberlain, whom he had criticized for his appeasement
strategy in dealing with Hitler, in his War Cabinet. In part this was due to
the fact that most Conservatives favored Chamberlain over Churchill;
nonetheless, Churchill was generous to his political enemies after the bat-
tle was won—something his adversaries were not throughout his long