Several years ago, I had the honor of being President of the board of directors of a very successful non-profit organization. That board was comprised of about 20 people who came from widely differing backgrounds. Some were male; some were female. Some had relatives who were served by the organization; others had only a community connection. Some were full of youthful exuberance; others possessed the wisdom that comes from a lifetime of experience. As you might expect, we often had spirited discussions on topics of importance to the organization. One day, during a particularly spirited discussion, one of our members named Bob quoted former General Electric CEO Jack Welch.
According to Bob, Jack Welch said, “If three of us are in a meeting, and we all share the same opinion, two of us are unnecessary.” I have tried several times to verify that Jack Welch actually said that, but so far, I have been unsuccessful in those attempts. Whether it was Jack Welch or someone else who first spoke the words is less important to me than their meaning. Bob and the words he quoted remind us that we come together on boards, in committees and on panels to share our individual points of view with others. Sharing these points of view is not merely an exercise; it helps to ensure that we have considered the matter from as many perspectives as possible. This usually results in a better decision than the one made by a single person in isolation.
As President of Clinton Community College, I try to remember those words. While I am quite capable of making decisions on my own, I tend more times than not to involve others in discussion before I make a major decision. Sometimes, the discussions reinforce my initial thoughts. In these cases, it is relatively easy for me to make a decision. At other times, the discussions expose one of my blind spots and help me to change my thinking on a topic. Especially in these cases, I appreciate the willingness of others to help me to see different points of view and reach a better decision than I might have reached on my own. There is a third situation that is much more challenging than the first two. Sometimes, even after hearing differing points of view on a topic, consensus cannot be reached, and we agree to disagree. In those cases, the weight on a President’s shoulders can be quite heavy.
At the end of the day, it is the President who has the authority to make major decisions for the college, and it is the President who is held accountable for those decisions. On occasions, a CEO will find it necessary to make a decision that runs contrary to one group or another, even after considering their point of view. In such cases, a wise CEO will examine his motives to make sure that ego is not the driving force. It is never a good idea for a leader to use “because I said so” as justification for a decision. Once ego is eliminated as a motive, the CEO is usually left with a short list of reasons to make one of those difficult decisions. Sometimes, it is a matter of ethics, a sense of doing what is right, even if it is unpopular. In such a case, the decision is usually very straightforward. At other times, it is a matter of perspective and judgment.
By the nature of their job, a CEO has to consider not only what is good for those within the organization, but what is good for the greater community that supports and relies on the organization. More than anyone else at the college, the CEO comes into frequent contact with external stakeholders, including the county sponsor, state legislators, trustees, and business leaders. These perspectives provide the CEO with diverse points of view that may not always be the same as those of the internal constituents, but are valid nonetheless.
So it seems to me that Jack Welch and my friend Bob were right: an organization does thrive when its CEO considers diverse points of view. These points of view come from inside and outside the organization. As a result of discussions around these diverse points of view, the President is better able to analyze the situation and to synthesize a solution. It then falls to the President to be accountable for the decision and to lead the organization forward on its mission, a responsibility that cannot be abdicated. Even if the President ultimately arrives at a different conclusion than some of the organization’s constituents, the inclusive discussion leading up to the conclusion can help all parties to understand how and why a decision was made.
That’s what I think. Please let me know what you think by sending an e-mail to presidentsblog@clinton.edu.
Posts
