Leadership Development Blogwatch – March 2009

Best of the Leadership Development Blogs

Whenever we’re unsure about whether we’re including too much leadership development and not enough general business fun and digression on AskTheManager.com, we develop the latest Leadership Development Blogwatch and realize that the blogosphere is so filled with junk science, juvenile opinions and professional hucksters that we should almost be forced to include more about how to develop the next generation of leaders and less of the fluff.

Lucky for us (and you) there are a few great leadership writers on the Web who crank out some terrific advice. This time around, we found a few gems including great articles from the likes of Paul MacDonald and Dan McCarthy (among others), and a couple of worthy posts from our friends at Catch Your Limit Consulting:

Reverse Mentoring

Catch Your Limit Consulting is a strategic management and marketing firm headquartered in Tallahassee, Florida with an office in Richmond, Virginia.

Striking the right chord  

When I was in high school, (and now, whenever I have the time to enjoy it), my life was music. On any given day, I’d spend at least 3 hours playing my




Leaders on Leadership: Your Experience + The Leadership Talk
Collaboration: An Important Leadership Development… Building Trust in the Workplace: A Valuable Topic … Modern Managers Need Leadership Skills · The Listening Leadership Talk · Home-Based Business Leadership Skills

Great Leadership: Where Have All the Leaders Gone? Open Your Eyes …
In my work, having been responsible for leadership development at three different companies, I see and hear about them every day. It’s a common practice for leaders to take “360 degree” assessments, where they collect feedback from …

Leadership Development Blog » Liars and Outliers – By Envisia Learning
HOT READS FOR THE PRACTIONER. Title: Outliers. Competency: self-development, coaching talent (especially those entering the workforce), performance evaluation, career management …

Intentional Leadership: Chesley Sullenberger: A True Leader
Strategies for Leadership Development in Lean Time… Setting Personal Goals · My (Crazy or Arrogant?) Views on Organizational Cu… Strategic Silence · National Day of Listening · What do Great Leaders Do? …

Traits of a Bad Boss : Industrial Market Trends
The result of hiring unprepared managers or promoting employees to managerial positions without providing proper guidance: “Effective leadership development can ultimately make or break a company’s performance,” …

Succession: Are You Ready? Tackles Toughest Management Challenge
Marshall Goldsmith’s blog from Amazon.com. Goldsmith has been heralded as one of 50 great thinkers and leaders who have influenced the field of management over the past 80 years, while Business Week listed him as one of the most influential practitioners in the history of leadership development.

Survival Leadership: The Effects of Layoffs on Surviving Employees
Survival Leadership. Leadership Development from a Top Executive Coach. Also, visit www.SteveGladis.com. Leading in a Downturn Economy. Leading in a Downturn Economy Survival Leadership.

Breaking Barriers: “Manage Like There Will Be A Tomorrow”
Dr. Jesse Sostrin is a sought after consultant and speaker working at the intersection of personal and professional development. He is the founder and president of Sostrin Consulting, an organization and leadership development firm

Leading Blog: A Leadership Blog @ LeadershipNow: Lincoln’s Lessons
Books · Change · Communication · Creativity & Innovation · Education · Ethics · Five Lessons · Followership · General Business · Government · Human Resources · Interviews · Leaders · Leadership · Leadership Development

Successful Managers Handbook Develop Yourself Coach Others
D. Bradford Neary Director, Executive & Leadership Development Medtronic, Inc. “No manager’s toolkit should be without it…indispensable.” — Greg Schaefer Manager, Curriculum Development Learning & Development Rockwell Collins

 

Leadership Lessons from the Stimulus and Obama

 

The Stimulus, Obama and Leadership

Eight Hundred Billion Dollars. $800,000,000,000.00. That’s a lot of money. When combined with the $700,000,000,000.00 squandered by or scheduled to be squandered by the Troubled Asset Relief Project (TARP), we’re talking about one and a half trillion dollars. In round numbers, $1.5 trillion looks like this: $1,500,000,000,000.00.

Hard to fathom, really. To give this amount some perspective, imagine this: $1.5 trillion is larger than the gross domestic product (GDP) of Spain. If the stimulus plus the TARP were a country, they’d be the 8th largest according to International Monetary Fund’s 2007 ranking.

So why is it so easy to spend?

While the TARP has clearly not performed as intended – to free up credit markets and salvage well-run financial institutions – at least it was directed with a specific and bipartisan purpose. Virtually everyone agreed it was the right thing to do at the time. (Today, not so much.)

It’s Not a Stimulus Package, it’s Welfare

Let’s stop kidding ourselves, okay? The package the Senate passed this weekend, even though it had more than $100 billion stripped from it, is more welfare than stimulus. It’s more government spending than economic stimulus. It’s more “more of the same” than it is “change you can believe in.”

Obama Needs to Lead

We elected Barack Obama as our 44th President so that he could lead this country through one of the economically toughest times in our history. Tough times call for tough decisions, tough love and tough leadership. Obama has so far failed on all three counts.

Tough Decisions include making the right call based on what is best for America. No one doubts that Obama’s own economic advisors – using their own economic models – show greater job creation and a shorter recession if the stimulus contained more tax cuts and less welfare. So why is Obama afraid to make the tough decisions and do what’s right? Why is the stimulus package just a conglomeration of left-wing leftovers and partisan welfare projects?

Tough Love means making those who made bad decisions live with the consequences of those decisions – even when it means they’re going to suffer. Too many Americans bet on the come that their homes would continue to skyrocket in value. They were wrong and now they’re suffering.




Too bad, we say. Obama should show strong leadership and apply the principles of tough love: you need to get yourself out of any situation you agreed to put yourself into. Sorry, but that’s what’s best for the rest of us.

Tough Leadership means standing up for what’s best for America – that’s his job – and this is going to be the hardest part. Pushing through the “Nancy Pelosi Welfare Reform Act of 2009” is not showing tough leadership and it’s not change – it’s politics as usual.

Step Up, Mr. President

President Obama, that’s not why we elected you. You are not supposed to be the Pro-Socialism Puppet as Rush Limbaugh portrays you. You are supposed to stand for something more. So why are you trying so hard to push through a spending package that will do nothing to save the economy and do everything to grow the government? Are you indebted to those who got you elected? Are you just another Chicago politician?

Leadership means leading. Leading, President Obama, is about shedding the partisanship and the obligations, and doing what you know is right. Leading sometimes means losing your friends; though I can tell you that any “friend” you lose while leading, wasn’t that good of a friend to being with.

 

Leadership Lessons from Corporate America’s Amateur Lobbyists

Leadership and the Bully Pulpit

Michael Jackson (no, not that Michael Jackson) loves the bully pulpit. AutoNation’s Michael Jackson, we’ll call him the “non-gloved-one,” is everywhere these days. Officially, he serves as the CEO of the largest automotive dealer group in the US. Unofficially, he serves as the primary spokesperson for all curmudgeons who are good with a hammer (so they think everything is a nail).

MJ seems like a great guy – the non-gloved-one is well-spoken in an everyman sort of way – he exudes both a confidence and an “awe shucks” humility that seem genuine. Great traits for leaders.

Character (on the surface) does not appear to be his problem – Jackson, you see, is quite the character. Our issues with Mr. Jackson stem from his inability to wean himself off his love of the camera and microphone; and his incredibly narrow sense of how to fix what’s wrong with the economy.

It’s Not All about the Cars, Stupid

Certainly, it’s as prudent for this Michael Jackson to advocate for the auto industry as it is for that other Michael Jackson to advocate for unsupervised slumber parties at Neverland Ranch. We get it – your shareholders benefit if the auto dealers benefit – that’s your job.




To this end, Mr. Jackson is advocating (in a big, big way) for Congress to dramatically raise the gasoline tax at a time when Americans need every penny in their collective pocket. An increase in the gasoline tax? Are you serious?

Let’s put aside whether or not a gasoline tax increase will help his industry (though we think its benefit would be dubious, at best). Raising taxes in a recession would be disastrous for the economy, driving consumers to spend less and hurting the overall economic health of all retailers (including the health of car dealers) even more.

One could argue that part of the woes his industry faces today were directly caused by the very $4 per gallon gasoline he so desperately wishes would return. Jackson’s argument – that his dealers (and manufacturers) will sell more electric and hybrid vehicles with a huge increase in the gasoline tax – is probably a sound assumption… for the short term.

Leadership is more than a Great PowerPoint Presentation

Like Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, Jackson appears to be crisscrossing the country looking for converts. We are not moved.

We cannot buy-in to his assertions that increasing taxes, especially gasoline taxes, is a good idea for what ails car dealers today. Automotive retailers, unfortunately, are selling vehicles today that are built better and last longer than their predecessors. This is really no different that a few years ago, of course. In 2006, when America’s car dealers sold over 16 million new units, consumers felt good about their present and future situations. They were willing to spend $30,000 on a new car even though their current vehicle was running just fine.

Buying a car in 2006 was a discretionary event; ripe with impulses and emotions. Buying a car in 2009 is a necessity event; driven by the need to get from point A to point B. Increasing the tax on gasoline (or raising any tax for that matter) makes any major purchase a necessity event. We will only buy a new car when it becomes necessary for us to do so; and if we purchased one of the 60 million new cars sold in the last four years, we probably don’t need another just yet.

This is why Jackson is advocating a hike in the gas tax. He believes that we’ll be forced to get rid of that 2006 Hummer once and for all. Okay Mike, once we trade in the gas guzzler for a Honda Civic Hybrid out of necessity, then what?

America’s car dealers, especially AutoNation, need Americans to make discretionary purchases to thrive and survive. Discretionary purchases cannot happen without discretionary income. Increasing taxes decreases discretionary spending; decreasing taxes increases discretionary spending. Sorry to break it to you Mike, but it really is that simple.

America Needs Higher Gas Taxes

From national security and environmental perspectives, we would love nothing more than for America to be 100% energy independent. OPEC, and especially the countries that make up OPEC, concern us. America cannot, over the long term, be dependent on “third worlders” for the growth of our economy.

Once our economy stabilizes, it may make sense to raise gasoline taxes. The revenues generated from these taxes could be used to make necessary infrastructure improvements; and the higher price of fuel, as Jackson notes, will drive consumers to purchase more energy-efficient vehicles. It will also drive them to drive less. All good for the environment.

In a recent podcast available on AutomotiveNews.com, Jackson even jokes that he could eventually become a Democrat with his drive for higher taxes. Really? Hey Mike, we’re sorry to inform you that advocating higher taxes probably makes you the Chairman of the Democratic Party today. Interestingly, in this particular podcast Jackson has moved off of his stance of advocating for the immediate tax increases, and has a newly stated goal of increasing these taxes in 2011 or 2012.

Hmm, then why shout from the rooftops for these increases in 2008 and 2009? Wouldn’t Jackson’s shareholders be better served if he lobbied for something that would actually spur economic growth? Perhaps something like a tax decrease?

As much as we like him, we have to tell this Michael Jackson to stick to moon walking and leave the economic decision making to someone (anyone) more qualified. Great leaders know when to use the bully pulpit and when to avoid it. They also understand that just because someone is giving you a microphone, doesn’t mean you should speak.

Leadership Development Blogwatch – January 2, 2009

 

Best of the Leadership Development Blogosphere

We scoured the Leadership Development posts and articles for the past several weeks to find just those precious few that deserve your attention:




Are Leaders Born Or Made?
Marshall Goldsmith and Howard Morgan studied the progress of 88000 managers who had been to leadership development training. The people who returned from the training, talked about it, and did deliberate work to apply their learning

Growing Leaders From Managers
Another leadership development opportunity is carefully providing nascent leaders with a low risk opportunity to demonstrate their abilities. These opportunities manifest themselves through leadership assignments on special projects or …

Five Tips For Leading with Integrity
I just released Five Tips For Leading With Integrity and wanted to share those with you here. Leaders must embrace and maintain steadfast ethical standards. They must foster the company’s commitment to employee stewardship and …

How Resilience Can Make or Break a Leader
Jack Welch, in his extraordinary book “Winning” notes resilience as one of the most important characteristics a leader can have: “The fourth characteristic [of senior leadership] is heavy-duty resilience. Every leader makes mistakes, …

Leave Me Alone! and other Leadership Development Strategies
For the past few months I have been seeking the advice of established philanthropic leaders from across the country to hear about what they did in their first few months on the job, how they balance work and home, and how to balance …

Real Leaders Eat Last – The Psychology of Leadership in the New …
… Designing individual effective leadership development programmes to groom next generation leaders within your company; Utilising “Real leaders eat last” and other unconventional concepts for leading staff in the new millennium …

Leaders on Leadership: Leadership Power Stress: (Part 2) Three …
Like many leadership development tasks, it is best to engage the services of a qualified executive coach. This is part 2 of a 2 part article on Leadership Power Stress by author Patsi Krakoff. In part 1, we examined the …

Doing It Right: Passion Part VI – Sacrifice
Let’s say you have preached about leadership development. Have you allocated resources to teach and engage the front line leadership in the organization? Don’t tell me where your priorities are. …

Coaching Tip: The Leadership Blog: Changing Minds within a Culture
“The crux of leadership development that works is self-directed learning: intentionally developing or strengthening an aspect of who you are or who you want to be, or both.” Primal Leadership by Daniel Goleman, Richard Boyatzis & Annie …

Trust Isn’t Everything — It’s The Only Thing
Coaching, Leaders in the News: Good News, Leadership Development. When Sam DiPiazza, CEO of PriceWaterhouseCoopers, appeared for an interview and student Q&A, he spoke of a childhood lesson that shaped him. Click on “losing the public …

 

Leadership Lessons from a Dead Socialist

Leading in the New Millennium: Pay for (Lack of) Performance

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” – Upton Sinclair

Although Sinclair’s words were uttered in 1935, they ring especially true when applied to the leadership void we face today. While Sinclair, a socialist, didn’t speak these words to decry the inattentive state of management during the Great Depression, his words speak volumes when applied to the CEOs, boards of directors, and other executives of the failed and failing businesses of this Great Recession.

We’re still a few months away from the first of many Lehman Perp Walks, though it’s important to note we believe that Sinclair’s quote can be equally applied to the senior leadership of Lehman as it could to the senior team at Enron.  

Enron and Lehman: Two Peas in a Pod

Let’s compare Ken Lay and Dick Fuld – two monosyllabic managers with their eyes on their own bank accounts and little regard for their employees or their shareholders.

Enron’s Lay claimed he had no responsibility for and little understanding of the risky and illegal ventures of his management team that bankrupted the giant company.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

Assuming Lay was telling the truth when he feigned ignorance regarding the schemes that brought down Enron, it’s easy to assume that he did not want to understand – he was making too much money in his ignorance.

Lehman’s Fuld claims his company and he were, in effect, victims of the housing and credit crisis. Dick Fuld made over a half a billion dollars during his 14 years as CEO of Lehman – that hardly qualifies him for victim status. Moreover, Fuld made his hundreds of millions all while allowing his company to dive into riskier investments requiring insane amounts of leverage.




When Fuld is finally brought to answer under oath for the enormous bankruptcy he orchestrated (his congressional testimony in October was a joke), he will no doubt claim he didn’t fully understand the credit default swaps and other risky investments his team was helping create.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

So What Must We Change?

Clearly shame and public humiliation aren’t enough to sway America’s CEOs to always act responsibly and in the best interest of the company’s shareholders. Case is point: Merrill Lynch CEO John Thain recently requested he be awarded a bonus of $10 million for 2008. Without going into Merrill’s ‘08 financials (or lack thereof), let’s just say that Thain proved, if nothing else, he has incredible nerve. (Boards of failed companies, generally, don’t even face shame or public humiliation – they just move on like carpetbaggers.)

Given the speed at which many companies are collapsing, it seems that even the alleged pay for performance packages that reward a CEO for some short term positive movement of a company’s share price are ineffective. Fuld had the gall to argue in front of congress that he delivered terrific shareholder value during the first 13 of his 14 years as CEO. Big deal, Dick, tell that to the September 2008 shareholders and employees.

Leaders as Stewards

CEOs, like US Presidents, serve at the pleasure of their constituents. Presidents serve at the pleasure of the American citizens; CEOs, allegedly, serve at the pleasure of the shareholders (the owners of the company). No matter how many years of prosperity a CEO has delivered (via shareholder value), a sudden bankruptcy that destroys a 158-year old company proves that the CEO was no steward; that personal gain (including stroking his own ego) was his primary (and possibly his only) goal.

If our business leaders fail to act as stewards, then our boards must act. If our boards fail to act, shareholders have little recourse beyond civil remedies that generally fail to change behaviors. Civil penalties for underperforming and/or incestuous boards are insufficient to stem the tide of bad leadership we’ve faced over the past decade.

Perp Walks for Boards

It’s time we criminalized the lazy, incestuous boards who fail to protect the shareholder. It’s time that more than a few directors received several years behind bars for every billion in shareholder value they failed to protect.

If you think what we’re requesting is akin to advocating the death penalty for jaywalking, you’re way off base. We asked someone who sits on three Fortune 500 boards (who spoke to us on the condition of anonymity) what made them feel they were qualified to sit on so many boards while leading another large company as CEO. Their response: “Listen, I get about $100,000 from each company for four meetings a year. I think I can handle it.”

Four meetings a year – unfortunately, that’s how far too many board members view their duties. What’s worse is that your “performance” (i.e. networking) on one board leads to appointments to other boards. Rock the boat, and you’re not asked to join the other boards.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

Amazing how a socialist like Sinclair can teach us so much about capitalism.

An Update to our Leadership Lessons from Brett Favre

Brett “Cuatro” Favre and the Leadership Lesson of Humility

When you’re wrong, you’re wrong. The best thing to do is admit it. We are certainly humble enough to admit it.

At the beginning of the 2008 NFL season we predicted that the New York Jets would finish the season no better than 8-8… we were wrong. (See our August 27, 2008 post.)

The addition of Cuatro, which we predicted would not be enough to help the Jets make the playoffs, was indeed not enough to help the Jets make the playoffs. We were right on that point (and yes, we do like to gloat). The New York Jets finished the 2008 season 9-7 and fired Head Coach Eric Mangini today (read the New York Daily News story here). It seems Cuatro leaves a wake wherever he goes.




To add insult to the Jets’ injury, they missed the playoffs because the quarterback they jettisoned in favor of Favre, Chad Pennington, led last year’s 1-15 Miami Dolphins to the playoffs by defeating the Favre-led Jets. That’s karma; and in leadership, karma can be a bitch.

We also predicted that Brett Favre would throw more interceptions than touchdowns in 2008. Well, we were wrong on that point, too. Favre threw exactly 22 touchdowns and 22 interceptions – pretty crappy for a future Hall of Fame QB, but still not what we predicted. While we admit we got that one wrong, we do want to point out that Favre still led the NFL in interceptions this year – in fact, he threw 22% more INTs than the next closest QB. (Perhaps he should change his number to 22.)

The Green Bay Packers, who let pride and ego get in the way of a good decision, finished the season 6-10 – a far cry from the 13-3 they enjoyed with Favre in 2007. The leadership lessons we pointed out in our July 17, 2008 post still ring true: Brett Lorenzo Favre is more important than the team (in his mind); and get out in front of issues early, speak the truth and stay firm in your convictions (we warned the Packers not to capitulate – they did).

Interestingly, unlike last year when the Favre-led Packers were in the playoffs, both the Green Bay and Favre have plenty of time off to rethink their 2008 leadership blunders. Something tells us they learned nothing from the experience – their lack of humility keeps getting in the way.

More Leadership Lessons from the Airline Industry – Delta Stubs Their Toe (Again)

More Leadership Lessons from Delta Airlines

In a recent post, we admonished Delta Airlines for the ill-conceived, confusing Delta Breezeway enacted in late 2007. It seemed that even months after its introduction, most Delta gate agents and Delta frequent fliers still had no idea how to use them.

We are proud to say that between Thanksgiving and Christmas, Delta gate agents suddenly began using the Delta Breezeway consistently across the seven different airports we used. (This is a record, to be sure, as any Delta gate outside of Atlanta or Cincinnati employed a different set of rules when using the Breezeway for the first ten months following its inception.)

Congratulations Delta for finally making sense of something so simple – of course, we still believe you could have rolled this out more intelligently; employing proper project management principles coupled with better education and training.

Delta Airlines – Not Sweating the Small Stuff

The debacle that was the Delta Breezeway reveals a lackadaisical attitude in the Delta boardroom for truly serving the customer. Delta simply doesn’t sweat the small stuff. In any normal leadership situation the ability to not sweat the small stuff is an admirable quality. Given the razor thin margins of the airline industry, it’s almost required that you sweat everything – especially the small stuff that impacts your customers.

Southwest Airlines (SWA) gets it. The SWA leadership has always been known as a group that plans everything from boarsding a plane to their overall business health. SWA gets it; and they generally get it right the first time.

As a disclaimer, it’s important to note that none of the AskTheManager editors enjoys flying on Southwest. Their cattle call style of assigning seats and loading planes might make logistical sense – and families with kids seem to be okay with it – but it is terrible for business fliers who travel for a living. That said, SWA is the healthiest airline in America and deserves to be studied by those who are struggling. (Hint for the other airlines: look at SWA’s leadership, and how the company tests and measures before they implement wholesale changes.)




You Cannot Test Ideas in the Boardroom

Southwest’s style of loading planes, as we wrote, has been a nuisance for business travelers – especially those who like to lounge before they fly. We must know we will have the aisle seat in the exit row and we don’t want to have to fight for it.

In the airline industry, unloading and loading planes quickly – faster than your rivals – earns you a competitive advantage. SWA gets this. They’ve made a conscience choice to forego most business travelers in return for better margins. That is their choice.

It’s old news, but Southwest experimented with assigned seating for about a year only to decide to slightly modify their 36-year old cattle drive in favor of a more orderly numbered seating system. (To read more about this decision, here’s a news story from September 2007.) No assigned seats, but with less of a cattle call. The leadership lesson for Delta is not that they should switch to a numbered system for assigning seats, rather that they should alter the way they enact changes at their struggling airline.

Last month – just days after Delta completed its merger with Northwest and proclaimed that there would be no immediate changes – Delta made an enormous change to the way everyone, including frequent fliers, gains access to premium seats (exit rows, most aisle seats and coach seats near the front of the aircraft). They adopted, without warning or testing, a system that we’ve been told was in place at Northwest. They wanted everyone to pay extra for those seats.

While we’re are certainly not opposed to Delta raising revenue in creative ways, we were absolutely shocked to learn that as frequent fliers we didn’t even have access to those seats until check-in. You see, Delta wanted to sell those seats at a premium to regular fliers, so they blocked frequent fliers from gaining access to those seats.

They clearly tested this concept only in the boardroom, and it passed with flying colors.

Oops, Time to Reverse another Bad Delta Decision

To their credit, Delta only made their coveted Platinum and Gold members suffer for a few weeks before they reversed this idiotic and untested change. We can only imagine the emails that flooded Delta.com complaining of this policy (we know of a few sent by us that were not pleasant).

The moral of this story for all businesses is to follow the Southwest example. Even when the world was telling them for decades that their system for assigning seats should be altered, they resisted the temptation to enact wholesale changes and tested (for months, in controlled situations at just a few select locations) a new system before determining a course of action.

This is why Southwest has fared better than Delta and the other large airlines. The Delta leadership could learn a thing or two from Southwest.  

Gallup Poll: Business Executives Lack Honesty and Integrity

“Business Executives” Rank Low in Annual Honesty and Ethics Poll

While nurses topped the list for the seventh consecutive year, business executives earned relatively poor grades in the latest installment of the annual integrity poll from Gallup.

The poll, which surveyed just over 1,000 US adults earlier this month, asked respondents how they would rate the honesty and ethical standards of people in one of twenty-one different professions. Lobbyists were dead last for the second consecutive year, followed closely by telemarketers and car salesmen. To see the entire list, follow this link.

The list of professions included in the Gallup poll reads somewhat like the results one might expect to see when a classroom of first graders are asked “what do you want to be when you grow up?” Adding princess, fireman, and army soldier would probably round out the possibilities for any group of six-year olds.

Funny thing about Gallup’s choice of professions; some, like “high school teachers,” are quite specific; while others, like “business executives,” are incredibly vague.

While none of the AskTheManager.com editors would argue against the need for more honesty and higher ethics in business, we are a little confused by Gallup’s use of the seemingly all-inclusive term “business executives.”

Liars, Damn Liars, and Pollsters

Just who are these “business executives” anyway? Are they Dick Fuld and the late Kenneth Lay? Are they P. Diddy and Donald Trump? Are they the millions of business owners, CEOs, COOs, presidents, vice presidents and other executives whose jobs are so different from one another that they hardly can be classified in fifty categories, let alone a single one?

We suspect that most of the 1,010 US adults who lack caller ID (otherwise, why would they answer a call from a pollster?) pictured some sinister, overweight, overpaid, cigar-chomping CEO of a bankrupt company when they were asked their opinion of business executives. Of course business executives ranked low.

While one can easily group extremely similar positions together to identify such professions as nurses, car salesmen, policemen, funeral directors, pharmacists, telemarketers, and real estate agents; we find ourselves struggling to identify what Gallup means by the nebulous group “business executives.”

It’s all in the Headlines




In 2001 (and only in 2001) this particular Gallup poll included the category “firefighters.” Not surprisingly, firefighters overwhelmingly topped all other professions that year (the poll was taken about two months after 9/11). This begs the question: Did the Gallup organization exploit the tragedy of 9/11 and the sudden popularity of firefighters for the sake of a more compelling headline?

Only Gallup knows for sure. Overall, we think this is a quaint little poll of very little value. Many of the twenty-one professions appear to be included merely to provide fodder for talk radio hosts and bloggers. Why else would Gallup include funeral directors and not coroners; lawyers and not judges; telemarketers and not convenience store clerks; or bankers and not bakers? Why only twenty-one professions?

Perhaps if Gallup were interested in delivering public opinions worthy of action, they might change their annual integrity poll to include hundreds of professions instead of just twenty-one. This should add a level of validity the current poll does not enjoy.

May we also suggest Gallup find suitable replacements for the ill-defined “business executives?” Perhaps the categories “Fortune 500 CEOs,” “small business owners,” “cartoon villains,” “mid-level managers,” “board members,” “white-collar criminals,” and “junior executives” would cover all possibilities.

Oh Yeah, Let’s Add One More Profession…

Lest we forget, we think it might be appropriate for Gallup to add one more profession to next year’s annual integrity poll: pollsters. Of course, we suspect they wouldn’t be happy with the results.