“The Night Watch” by Rembrandt

https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6180/6175115377_b05549d36a_b.jpg ron palinkasCompleted in 1642, Rembrandt van Rijn’s The Night Watch is not only a highlight of a career that spanned over 600 paintings, but also acclaimed as arguably the greatest portrait of the Dutch Baroque era.

1. ITS ALTERNATE TITLES ARE MUCH LONGER AND MORE SPECIFIC.

There are several, including: Officers and Other Civic Guardsmen of District II of Amsterdam, under the command of Captain Frans Banninck Cocq and Lieutenant Willem van RuytenburchMilitia Company of District II under the Command of Captain Frans Banninck Cocq; and The Shooting Company of Frans Banninck Cocq and Willem van Ruytenburch.While the details vary, the key thing was that Cocq (wearing a red sash) and Ruytenburch (in yellow beside Cocq) get their recognition. Still, it’s little wonder the nickname The Night Watch caught on.

 2. THE NIGHT WATCH IS NOT SET AT NIGHT.

Over the next hundred years, the nickname Night Watch became more popular than the painting’s cumbersome monikers. However, Rembrandt’s painting was set in daytime. The dark background mistaken for night’s sky was actually a varnish turned dark with age and dirt. During a restoration in the 1940s, the varnish was removed, but the name stuck.

3. IT’S A CELEBRATED EXAMPLE OF CHIAROSCURO.

Italian for “light-dark,” the term refers to works that play dramatically with shadow to create volume and a sense of three dimensions.

ron palinkas global technical services manager4. REMBRANDT MAY HAVE A CAMEO IN THE NIGHT WATCH.

You’d likely miss him amidst this bustling company of distinguished men, but in the middle of the painting, behind a man in green and a guard with a metal helm, you can spot a barely-there man. Only his eye and a beret are visible, but this elusive figure is believed to be how Rembrandt wedged himself into his most famous work. 

5. THAT LITTLE BLONDE GIRL ISN’T MILITARY—SHE’S A MASCOT.

This seemingly misplaced moppet carries a chicken with pronounced claws and a pistol called a klover. Both were symbols for the Kloveniers, Amsterdam’s civic guard, a guild that commissioned the painting for their meeting hall.

6. IT WAS MEANT TO BE PART OF A CONTINUOUS PANEL SERIES.

Rembrandt was one of six artists the Kloveniers hired for group portraits of their members. He, Pickenoy, Bakker, Van der Helst, Van Sandrart and Flinck were each charged with creating a piece within specific parameters so they could be displayed side by side as an “unbroken frieze of large paintings, each matching the other and fixed in the wooden paneling of the room to form a meticulously designed total interior concept.” But Rembrandt strayed from what was expected in both composition and color.

7. THE NIGHT WATCH BROKE FROM MILITARY PORTRAIT TRADITION.

Countless captains, colonels, and cadets had been painted in portraits of a static nature. Rembrandt broke from convention by showing his military men in apparent motion.

8. REMBRANDT GOT STIFFED ON HIS COMMISSION. 

After The Night Watch was finished, Rembrandt entered into a decade-long period where he stopped producing portraits and scaled back painting production dramatically. It’s long been assumed that the guild members who were supposed to pay for these portraits didn’t feel they were given enough spotlight, and refused to ante up their fair share, with this discontent ruining Rembrandt’s reputation. But more modern scholarship indicates that the Kloveniers were happy with the unconventional painting and displayed it in the hall. As for Rembrandt’s post-Night Watch funk? It may just have been that he felt he had overstretched the bounds of his art and needed to reset.

ron palinkas ron palinkas global technical services manager9. IT’S BIGGER THAN YOU’D THINK …

In addition to being Rembrandt’s most famous painting, at nearly 12 feet by 14 feet, The Night Watch was also his largest one.

10. … WHICH MEANT THE VERSION YOU KNOW WAS EDITED.

Seventy-three years after its creation, the massive painting was moved to Amsterdam’s town hall. However, it was too big to fit the wall where it was meant to hang. As was common at the time, the painting’s canvas was cut to better accommodate its new home. In this edit, the top of the arch, the balustrade, and the edge of the step were lost, along with two figures on the left side.

Thankfully, a small copy of the painting made by Gerrit Lundens gives a clear idea of the original’s composition.

11. THE PAINTING CONTAINS ITS OWN CAPTION KEY.

Rembrandt was long dead when The Night Watch was transferred to the town hall and trimmed for the occasion. But this wasn’t the only unapproved revision made to his piece. An unknown hand added a shield to the archway—the script on the shield contains the 18 names of the featured Kloveniers.

12. THE NIGHT WATCH HAS ITS OWN PERSONAL ESCAPE ROUTE.

Museum fires have caused the loss of great works of art, so Amsterdam’s Rijksmuseum has gone to great lengths to protect Rembrandt’s masterpiece. To preserve The Night Watch in emergencies, the Rijksmuseum installed a trap door complete with escape slide in 1934.

13. THE NIGHT WATCH HAS BEEN ATTACKED THREE TIMES.

On January 13, 1911, a down-and-out navy cook slashed The Night Watch with a knife, reportedly as a protest against his unemployment. A second knife attack occurred on September 14, 1975, this time courtesy of a Dutch schoolmaster who believed destroying it was his divine mission. After that, the painting was put under permanent guard. Nevertheless, an unemployed Dutchman sprayed concentrated sulfuric acid on the piece on April 6, 1990. Each time, restorations were able to repair the damage, with barely a battle scar remaining.

14. IT HAS LONG BEEN THE HEART OF ONE OF THE WORLD’S GREATEST GALLERIES.

In 1885, the construction of the Amsterdam’s Rijksmuseum was centered on exhibiting Rembrandt’s massive masterwork. Nearly 120 years later, the museum underwent a decade-long renovation. As the museum’s director Wim Pijbes prepared for its reopening in 2013, he proudly declared, “Everything has changed, the only thing that hasn’t is The Night Watch. It is the altarpiece of the Rijksmuseum, the whole place is arranged around this beautiful masterpiece.”

15. ITS RETURN TO PUBLIC DISPLAY WAS CELEBRATED WITH A FLASH MOB.

Originally posted by www.mentalfloss.com/article

Escape Rooms and Team Building

https://escapefactory.nl/en/home/Every few years a new theory is launched on the best way to build cohesiveness among small teams.  It can be things like a ROPES course, role-playing, or even and outing to a sporting event.  One of the latest “experience destinations” is the “escape room.”  A fairly straight-forward event, small groups assemble and are placed in a small rule filled with clues and puzzles.  Their goal is to escape within the prescribed time limit, usually one hours.

More difficult that it sounds, it is easier if you have people who are able to work together.,  Scouring the room for clues to unlock secret cupboards and chests.  The challenge is to find solutions and brainstorm for ideas all while working under a time constraint.  In our recent experience, this limit was one hour, trying to discover the clues to help us unlock 4 digit combination locks.  Our group had to analyze clues, decide on ways to best use our time for trying combinations, and brainstorm to make sense of the few clues we were given.

As important as the team aspects of this event were, the real value is building a history or memories of common experiences.  Teams work together when they have a common thread of events.  This is especially important with remote groups.  The escape room is one great way, but the other could be a service visit that did not go as planned,  a dinner that was not what was expected, or a trip to an art museum together.  All these events build familiarity and commonality that can move a team forward with great speed.

Try the Escape Room in Amsterdam or similar rooms throughout the world.

 

Lincoln on Leadership

http://baylorlariat.com/2015/09/14/honest-abe-on-display-poage-library-sheds-light-on-life-of-president-lincoln-with-on-campus-exhibit/President Abraham Lincoln appointed the best and brightest to his Cabinet, individuals who were also some of his greatest political rivals. He demonstrated his leadership by pulling this group together into a unique team that represented the greatest minds of his time, according to historian Doris Kearns Goodwin.

Lincoln demonstrated an ability to withstand adversity and to move forward in the face of frustration, said Kearns Goodwin, a keynote speaker at SHRM’s 2008 Annual Conference in Chicago. She identified 10 qualities that made Lincoln a great leader. Ten qualities Kearns Goodwin believes we should look for in our present day leaders.

 

Capacity to Listen to Different Points of View

While researching her Pulitzer Prize winning book, Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, Kearns Goodwin learned that Lincoln had the capacity to listen to different points of view. He created a climate where Cabinet members were free to disagree without fear of retaliation. At the same time, he knew when to stop the discussion and after listening to the various opinions, make a final decision.

Ability to Learn on the Job

Lincoln was able to acknowledge errors, learn from them, and then move. In this way, he established a culture of learning in his administration, said Kearns Goodwin.

Ready Willingness to Share Credit for Success

In response to concerns expressed by friends about the actions of some of his Cabinet members, Lincoln stated that the “path to success and ambition is broad enough for two” said Kearns Goodwin. When there was success, Lincoln shared the credit with all of those involved.

Ready Willingness to Share Blame for Failure

When mistakes were made by members of his Cabinet, Lincoln stood up for them said Kearns Goodwin. When contracts related to the war effort raised serious questions about a member of his administration, Lincoln spoke up and indicated that he and his entire Cabinet were to blame.

Awareness of Own Weaknesses

Kearns Goodwin noted that one of the weaknesses acknowledged by Lincoln was his tendency to give people too many chances and because he was aware, he was able to compensate for that weakness. As an example, she stated that George McClellan, Commander in Chief of the Union Army, refused to follow directives about the war effort. Lincoln eventually set a deadline and eventually removed McClellan from the position.

Ability to Control Emotions

According to Kearns Goodwin, Lincoln treated those he worked with well. However, he did get angry and frustrated, so he found a way to channel those emotions. He was known to sit down and write what he referred to as a “hot letter” to the individual he was angry with and then he would set the letter aside and not send it. If he did lose his temper, Lincoln would follow up with a kind gesture or letter to let the individual know he was not holding a grudge, said Kearns Goodwin. She noted that one of the letters was released as part of Lincoln’s Presidential papers with a notation that it was never signed nor sent.

Know How to Relax and Replenish

Lincoln understood the importance of relaxation and humor to shake of the stress of the day and to replenish himself for the challenges of the next day. According to Kearns Goodwin, Lincoln had a wonderful sense of humor and loved to tell funny stories. He encouraged a healthy atmosphere of laughter and fun in his administration. He also enjoyed going to the theater and spending time with friends.

Go Out into the Field and Manage Directly

During the Civil War, many soldiers died and there were many ups and downs. Lincoln established lasting connections with the troops by visiting the battlefield and hospitals, which also helped bolster morale.

Lincoln also spent time talking with members of the public, taking ‘public opinion baths’ according to Kearns Goodwin. He held public receptions and made a point of shaking everyone’s hand and speaking to each individual.

Strength to Adhere to Fundamental Goals

In the summer of 1864, said Kearns Goodwin, the war was not going well for the North. Members of his political party came to Lincoln and said that there was no way to win the war and he might need to compromise on slavery. Lincoln held firm on the issue of slavery and turned away from this advice.

Ability to Communicate Goals and Vision

Kearns Goodwin stated that Lincoln had a “remarkable ability to communicate his goals to his countrymen.” He made concepts simple and communicated with an understanding of the concerns of the citizens.

When the war ended and he won reelection, Lincoln did not focus on his achievements said Kearns Goodwin. Rather, in his second inaugural speech, Lincoln focused on bringing the country together as expressed in the following excerpt. “With malice toward none, with charity for all, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”

Kearns Goodwin ended her keynote address with the following words from Leo Tolstoy about Abraham Lincoln. His greatness consisted of the “integrity of his character and moral fiber of his being.”

 

Originally posted on http://hr.blr.com

17 Field Service Stats

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1731&bih=839&q=statistics&oq=statistics&gs_l=img.3..0l10.1993.5465.0.5656.11.8.0.3.3.0.231.578.7j0j1.8.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..0.11.583.EixuaG-ygcE#imgrc=k9aTPAbVoyGkHM%3A ron palinkas field service

 

We’re living in a world driven by futuristic devices and instant customer service expectations. Just look at the swift rise of Uber, Amazon Prime Now, or Facebook’s Oculus Rift. Customers have more to expect from companies. One thing is certain; field service will look much different in a few short years.

 

Facing all this new technology can seem daunting to field service professionals. But hey, we’re a tough lot. We can handle just about anything, right?  You might be trying to convince your boss to adopt new technology. Or maybe you’re just keeping up with all the trends this year. Either way, 2017 is shaping up to be a big year in field service management. Here are 17 stats and trends to fuel an unbeatable 2017 field service strategy.

1. 76% of field service providers report they are struggling to achieve revenue growth.

Increased competition and technology expectations from customers have squeezed revenues of field service providers. The field service winners in 2017 will deliver faster resolution times. They will also deliver the right customer experience and have smarter uses for technology.

2. Maximizing satisfaction with customer journeys has the potential to lift revenue by up to 15% percent while lowering cost of serving customers by as much as 20%.

Source, McKinsey.

Personalization is increasingly important in our economy. Field service providers must know their customers well and provide a just-right experience. These providers will see their revenue bounce back in 2017.

3. 97% of consumers said customer service is important to their choice or loyalty to a brand.

Source, Microsoft.

In a world with more and more choices, the true field service differentiator is service. This means customer-centric field service organizations will pull even further ahead in 2017.

4.58% of field service pros report their top pressure is competition in product and service.

Source, Aberdeen.

It will be more important to offer the best possible service and the most up-to-date products for field service success. With access to more information online than ever before, should customers expect any less?

5. Best-in-class field service organizations are 72% more likely than peers to utilize visual collaboration tools.

Source, Aberdeen.

We’re facing more information than ever in field service management. The smartest field service pros will get visual with route planning, dispatch management, and more.

6. 64% of consumers have switched providers in at least one industry due to poor customer service.

Source, Accenture

According to Accenture, we’re living in an era where customer loyalty is at an all-time low. Most customers will leave after a single bad experience. It’s crucial that field service organizations focus on their tech’s role. This should grow their customer base in 2017.

7. 73% of consumers say valuing their time is the most important thing a company can do to provide them with good service.

Source, Forrester.

Many customers still face four to eight hour service windows. To pull ahead in 2017, organizations must communicate exact customer times. And they should value customer time by resolving jobs faster.

8. 84% of millennial customers have used a self-service portal for customer service.

Source, Microsoft.

Millennials have come to see self-service as mandatory. Your organization should provide information to help millennials resolve their problems faster. Otherwise you’ll likely face a drop in these customers in the coming year.

9. 68% of 18 to 34-year-old consumers have stopped doing business with a brand due to a single poor customer service experience.

Source, Microsoft.

18 to 34-year-olds value experiences above products, brands, or services. Field service organizations with expert customer service will build a base of young customers next year.

10. 72% of best-in-class field service companies use customer feedback to measure service and employee performance.

Source, Aberdeen.

Customer feedback is crucial to any business. But are you using it to get specifics about service and employee performance? Smart field service companies will be quick with this data. They will check in on techs more often with performance data.

11. 92% of executives feel they must adapt service models to keep up with customers’ needs.

Source, Salesforce.

Executives are feeling the heat from customers. The best among them in field service will do what they need to survive. They will adapt.

12. 52% of companies are still using manual methods to handle field service.

Source, Salesforce

This number will fall in 2017 as more organizations realize the potential of automation.

13. The field service management software industry has grown 12.6% annually from 2011 to 2016.

Source, IBIS World.

Software continues to offer field service organizations help in a variety of areas. The biggest winners in 2017 will install software that can be quickly scaled. This software must also streamline their most time consuming tasks. This will free up their most talented employees and allow them to focus on the customer.

14. There will be 50 Billion internet-connected devices by 2020, a 100% increase over 2015.

Source, Cisco.

Mobile will be key to field service in 2017. Customers will come to expect consumer-like experiences with their devices. The field service organizations that offer top-notch experiences will pull ahead.

15. More than 62% of field service leaders leverage some level of a BYOD (bring your own device) strategy.

Source, Aberdeen.

Most field service organizations do their best to accommodate BYOD culture. The top players will install strategies that ensure employee devices are secure and perform well.

16. In a recent study, field service accounts receivables error rates averaged 53%, but just 14% among providers utilizing cloud-based accounts receivables software.

Source, Aberdeen.

Organizations that use cloud-based software in key business areas should pull more cash from their customers.

17. 88% of customers use at least 1 online channel while prospecting (shopping) and 40% want more digital interaction than what companies are providing.

Source, Accenture.

Customers have gone digital, but can field service keep up? Customers in 2017 will demand to have their service questions answered in their most convenient channel. This could be Twitter, on the web, or at a customer’s doorstep. No matter what, the best field service organization will be waiting with an answer.

 

 

15 Diseases of Leadership

https://hbr.org/2015/04/the-15-diseases-of-leadership-according-to-pope-francisPope Francis has made no secret of his intention to radically reform the administrative structures of the Catholic church, which he regards as insular, imperious, and bureaucratic. He understands that in a hyper-kinetic world, inward-looking and self-obsessed leaders are a liability.

Last year, just before Christmas, the Pope addressed the leaders of the Roman Curia — the Cardinals and other officials who are charged with running the church’s byzantine network of administrative bodies. The Pope’s message to his colleagues was blunt. Leaders are susceptible to an array of debilitating maladies, including arrogance, intolerance, myopia, and pettiness. When those diseases go untreated, the organization itself is enfeebled. To have a healthy church, we need healthy leaders.

Through the years, I’ve heard dozens of management experts enumerate the qualities of great leaders. Seldom, though, do they speak plainly about the “diseases” of leadership. The Pope is more forthright. He understands that as human beings we have certain proclivities — not all of them noble. Nevertheless, leaders should be held to a high standard, since their scope of influence makes their ailments particularly infectious.

The Catholic Church is a bureaucracy: a hierarchy populated by good-hearted, but less-than-perfect souls. In that sense, it’s not much different than your organization. That’s why the Pope’s counsel is relevant to leaders everywhere.

With that in mind, I spent a couple of hours translating the Pope’s address into something a little closer to corporate-speak. (I don’t know if there’s a prohibition on paraphrasing Papal pronouncements, but since I’m not Catholic, I’m willing to take the risk.)

Herewith, then, the Pope (more or less):

____________________

The leadership team is called constantly to improve and to grow in rapport and wisdom, in order to carry out fully its mission. And yet, like any body, like any human body, it is also exposed to diseases, malfunctioning, infirmity. Here I would like to mention some of these “[leadership] diseases.” They are diseases and temptations which can dangerously weaken the effectiveness of any organization.

  1. The disease of thinking we are immortal, immune, or downright indispensable, [and therefore] neglecting the need for regular check-ups. A leadership team which is not self-critical, which does not keep up with things, which does not seek to be more fit, is a sick body. A simple visit to the cemetery might help us see the names of many people who thought they were immortal, immune, and indispensable! It is the disease of those who turn into lords and masters, who think of themselves as above others and not at their service. It is the pathology of power and comes from a superiority complex, from a narcissism which passionately gazes at its own image and does not see the face of others, especially the weakest and those most in need. The antidote to this plague is humility; to say heartily, “I am merely a servant. I have only done what was my duty.”
  1. Another disease is excessive busyness. It is found in those who immerse themselves in work and inevitably neglect to “rest a while.” Neglecting needed rest leads to stress and agitation. A time of rest, for those who have completed their work, is necessary, obligatory and should be taken seriously: by spending time with one’s family and respecting holidays as moments for recharging.
  1. Then there is the disease of mental and [emotional] “petrification.” It is found in leaders who have a heart of stone, the “stiff-necked;” in those who in the course of time lose their interior serenity, alertness and daring, and hide under a pile of papers, turning into paper pushers and not men and women of compassion. It is dangerous to lose the human sensitivity that enables us to weep with those who weep and to rejoice with those who rejoice! Because as time goes on, our hearts grow hard and become incapable of loving all those around us. Being a humane leader means having the sentiments of humility and unselfishness, of detachment and generosity.
  1. The disease of excessive planning and of functionalism. When a leader plans everything down to the last detail and believes that with perfect planning things will fall into place, he or she becomes an accountant or an office manager. Things need to be prepared well, but without ever falling into the temptation of trying to eliminate spontaneity and serendipity, which is always more flexible than any human planning. We contract this disease because it is easy and comfortable to settle in our own sedentary and unchanging ways.
  2. The disease of poor coordination. Once leaders lose a sense of community among themselves, the body loses its harmonious functioning and its equilibrium; it then becomes an orchestra that produces noise: its members do not work together and lose the spirit of camaraderie and teamwork. When the foot says to the arm: ‘I don’t need you,’ or the hand says to the head, ‘I’m in charge,’ they create discomfort and parochialism.
  1. There is also a sort of “leadership Alzheimer’s disease.” It consists in losing the memory of those who nurtured, mentored and supported us in our own journeys. We see this in those who have lost the memory of their encounters with the great leaders who inspired them; in those who are completely caught up in the present moment, in their passions, whims and obsessions; in those who build walls and routines around themselves, and thus become more and more the slaves of idols carved by their own hands.
  1. The disease of rivalry and vainglory. When appearances, our perks, and our titles become the primary object in life, we forget our fundamental duty as leaders—to “do nothing from selfishness or conceit but in humility count others better than ourselves.” [As leaders, we must] look not only to [our] own interests, but also to the interests of others.
  1. The disease of existential schizophrenia. This is the disease of those who live a double life, the fruit of that hypocrisy typical of the mediocre and of a progressive emotional emptiness which no [accomplishment or] title can fill. It is a disease which often strikes those who are no longer directly in touch with customers and “ordinary” employees, and restrict themselves to bureaucratic matters, thus losing contact with reality, with concrete people.
  1. The disease of gossiping, grumbling, and back-biting. This is a grave illness which begins simply, perhaps even in small talk, and takes over a person, making him become a “sower of weeds” and in many cases, a cold-blooded killer of the good name of colleagues. It is the disease of cowardly persons who lack the courage to speak out directly, but instead speak behind other people’s backs. Let us be on our guard against the terrorism of gossip!
  1. The disease of idolizing superiors. This is the disease of those who court their superiors in the hope of gaining their favor. They are victims of careerism and opportunism; they honor persons [rather than the larger mission of the organization]. They think only of what they can get and not of what they should give; small-minded persons, unhappy and inspired only by their own lethal selfishness. Superiors themselves can be affected by this disease, when they try to obtain the submission, loyalty and psychological dependency of their subordinates, but the end result is unhealthy complicity.
  1. The disease of indifference to others. This is where each leader thinks only of himself or herself, and loses the sincerity and warmth of [genuine] human relationships. This can happen in many ways: When the most knowledgeable person does not put that knowledge at the service of less knowledgeable colleagues, when you learn something and then keep it to yourself rather than sharing it in a helpful way with others; when out of jealousy or deceit you take joy in seeing others fall instead of helping them up and encouraging them.
  1. The disease of a downcast face. You see this disease in those glum and dour persons who think that to be serious you have to put on a face of melancholy and severity, and treat others—especially those we consider our inferiors—with rigor, brusqueness and arrogance. In fact, a show of severity and sterile pessimism are frequently symptoms of fear and insecurity. A leader must make an effort to be courteous, serene, enthusiastic and joyful, a person who transmits joy everywhere he goes. A happy heart radiates an infectious joy: it is immediately evident! So a leader should never lose that joyful, humorous and even self-deprecating spirit which makes people amiable even in difficult situations. How beneficial is a good dose of humor! …
  1. The disease of hoarding. This occurs when a leader tries to fill an existential void in his or her heart by accumulating material goods, not out of need but only in order to feel secure. The fact is that we are not able to bring material goods with us when we leave this life, since “the winding sheet does not have pockets” and all our treasures will never be able to fill that void; instead, they will only make it deeper and more demanding. Accumulating goods only burdens and inexorably slows down the journey!
  1. The disease of closed circles, where belonging to a clique becomes more powerful than our shared identity. This disease too always begins with good intentions, but with the passing of time it enslaves its members and becomes a cancer which threatens the harmony of the organization and causes immense evil, especially to those we treat as outsiders. “Friendly fire” from our fellow soldiers, is the most insidious danger. It is the evil which strikes from within. As it says in the bible, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste.”
  1. Lastly: the disease of extravagance and self-exhibition. This happens when a leader turns his or her service into power, and uses that power for material gain, or to acquire even greater power. This is the disease of persons who insatiably try to accumulate power and to this end are ready to slander, defame and discredit others; who put themselves on display to show that they are more capable than others. This disease does great harm because it leads people to justify the use of any means whatsoever to attain their goal, often in the name of justice and transparency! Here I remember a leader who used to call journalists to tell and invent private and confidential matters involving his colleagues. The only thing he was concerned about was being able to see himself on the front page, since this made him feel powerful and glamorous, while causing great harm to others and to the organization.

Friends, these diseases are a danger for every leader and every organization, and they can strike at the individual and the community levels.

 

http://hbr.com/leadership