Verified by Leadership
McCain's Mistake, My Mistake, and Harry Levinson's Genius.
McCain's Mistake, My Mistake, and Harry Levinson's Genius.
Posted September 24, 2008
Today, 9/24/08, I think John S. McCain made a strategic mistake. I know I did. What’s Harry Levinson, the psychoanalyst most responsible for linking psychology with business, got to do with it? Nothing directly, but when I was a psychotherapist at Harvard Medical School’s McLean Hospital, and had my first inkling of becoming a business coach, a CEO I knew gave me a book of Levinson’s readings on “executive psychology” entitled, “Ready, Fire, Aim.” Well, I’ve been thinking about that title all day, and am convinced that McCain and I were both guilty of engaging in an ill-considered reaction pattern of that sort.
McCain erred, I believe, by suspending his campaign today in order to fly to Washington, D.C. and serve as a “senior statesman” in Congress. His goal? To help Treasury Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke generate comprimise legislation designed to shore-up our heavily threatened economic system. Don’t get me wrong; I applaud McCain’s courage, his selflessness, integrity and, in the main, his leadership acumen. In fact, what he did today is paradigmatic of what is best in a leader (acting boldly) as I noted in my last blog. But what I omitted from that blog is that there are exceptions to every rule, and today McCain violated one of them big time.
My error –and I thank two individuals who made it salient to me with their comments on my blog, “abipartisanopinion” and Jennifer— was that I REACTED in haste and misplaced “righteous indignation, and did not survey the entire situation I was in before doing a “Ready, Fire, Aim.” For you first-time readers, this morning I found one comment about my last blog inappropriate and offensive. I (wrongly) took offense because a reader, as I saw it, thwarted me from realizing the goal behind my blog: Spirited, INTELLECTUAL DEBATE. Unfortunately –and I am ashamed to admit it— by “biting” at the taunts of the person who, I felt, misrepresented my work, I impeded my goals and, worse yet, caused distress to “neutral” readers.
I apologize to anyone reading this (and my last) blog who felt they might be a regular reader and is now (as Jennifer seems to have been) questioning that choice. I acted inappropriately.
So why do I feel Senator McCain did what I did? He didn’t get into a pissing contest. I mean, it could even be said that McCain was marching in lockstep to what I said all good leaders should do –act boldly. Sure, but everything (even love and oxygen) to excess is damaging, and McCain was excessively bold today. Here’s why:
Courage 101; Look Before You Leap. I never met a man with more political skills than Brad Hildebrandt, founder & CEO of the world’s largest legal consulting firm. A fisherman (as I am), Brad used countless aphorisms and benevolent “fish stories” to help grease the skids when negotiations were getting bogged-down or contentious. My favorite –one he used to break deadlocks or inertia within the ranks of his consultancy— was, “Look; I never mind going out on a limb; I just want to make sure that someone is on the tree with me” (or words to that effect).
McCain failed to look back at the tree before going WAY OUT on a limb. To McCain’s credit, this is who he has been forever: From passing-up an opportunity to leave a prison camp in favor of remaining with his men, to declaring, “I’d rather lose a presidential election than lose a war” (or words to that effect). In these instances, McCain went out on a limb, but there were folks in the trees to catch him (so to speak). Today, Senator Obama outplayed him by continuing his campaign. Worse yet, McCain should have known that the most vocal and influential media outlets are not only NOT in the tree waiting to catch him, they have proven their desire to shake him loose.
In today’s political environment –where the New York Times, Washington Post, and MSNBC are truly gunning for McCain’s hide—making a move (like suspending a presidential campaign) that can be “spun” into a negative is foolhardy, irrespective of its intent.
Ditto my pissing contest today on my blog. I am passionate about my work, very selective with whom I will work (I was ABSOLUTELY JOKING, IF YOU READ MY WORDS, ABOUT OFFERING COACHING SERVICES TO OBAMA), and committed to advancing psychology as a science. That said, I’m thin-skinned and need to refrain from self-destructive responses. [Were I narcissistic, however, as accused, the “slights” would have rolled off me like water off a duck’s back. Narcissists only relate to what other “elite” individuals say.]
What Harry Levinson Would Have Advised. I only met Harry Levinson twice when my office and his were both in Belmont, MA, but each meeting is as fresh in my mind as if it occurred yesterday (they were decades ago). I cannot swear to it, but if I could get coached by Dr. Levinson –and pass the advice on to the McCain campaign—I am certain it would be akin to what my father used to say (quoting Theodore Roosevelt): “Walk softly and carry a big stick.” In this instance, that phrase means, “Take charge of a situation, but don’t discharge unnecessarily (either a defiant employee, or an ‘attack bomb’).”
In a 1964 article for Think, IBM’s in-house magazine, Levinson said:
Unless the leader in any situation takes charge, and makes it clear that he is in charge, his subordinates are likely to challenge him and be in conflict with each other.
McCain did not take charge today because he could not. He does not control Mr. Obama, Congress, Secretary Paulson, Mr. Bernake or political pundits. For this reason alone, unilateral action was, in my opinion, imprudent.
I certainly didn’t take charge today for precisely the same reason: I cannot (nor should I have the right to) control what comments my blog generates. Dissent is enlivening, enlightening, and endemic to a blog; believe me, I welcome it. I reacted poorly to being either misunderstood or misrepresented. But that is not the point. It is not my place to do more than present informed opinion for the “global” (in this case, PT readers’) good. As Levinson, in his brilliance realized, my inability to take charge –and my failed effort to do so—precipitated “in-fighting” among readers, not the exchange of ideas about business coaching. I soiled my nest and, for the final time, I am sorry.
