Leadership - Followership

-
Good leaders MUST be good followers. All to often people will get drunk on the idea of "being in charge" and forget that they're still part of a larger team. I've seen teams work on projects that are completely counterproductive to the objectives of the larger organization. You are a piss poor leader if you do not follow your leader.

Without followers you are not a leader. You might be "in-charge", but that doesn't necessarily make you a leader. Many folks make the mistake of assuming that having their name at the top of the org chart makes them the leader. This is not so and is a myth that should be dispelled.

Good followers are not necessarily good leaders. Perhaps the best example of the peter principle at work is to have people try and "groom" good followers into becoming good leaders. While this may work in some situations, there are people who are perfectly happy to follow and not take on the responsibility of leadership.

EGO will make folks bad followers AND bad leaders. The fact that a leader-follower relationship exists should imply that there is a team with shared objectives. When you are on a team, you must check your ego at the door, it's not about you, it's about the team.

Comments

Unknown said…
I'm a firm believer that everyone can be a leader at something. They just need the right opportunity and the ability to accept that failure is always an option.
January 4, 2010 at 9:01 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Please use ANSI-92 SQL Join Syntax

-
Image
Way back in 1992, a standard was published for SQL. In it, the syntax for specifying joins in SQL Database was finally standardized. This was a good thing because (for folks who've been doing this a while), trying to decode the vagaries of how various Databases handled outer joins could drive you bonkers yielding different results depending on the parse order of things in the from and where clauses. Unfortunately, some DBMS vendors took a while to adopt this standard (Oracle didn't support it until 2001), but at this point if you're using a major RDBMS and NOT using it, you're probably mired in a tradition or habit that bears changing. As an example of what I'm describing, here are some examples of what I mean. Old School (no standard syntax + implementation and evaluation of predicates varied by vendor [and query]): select * from customer, order where customer.customer = order.customerid ANSI way (agreed to standard, predicate evaluation has some rules
Read more

the myth of asynchronous JDBC

-
Image
I keep seeing people (especially in the scala/typesafe world) posting about async jdbc libraries. STOP IT! Under the current APIs, async JDBC belongs in a realm with Unicorns, Tiger Squirrels, and 8' spiders. While you might be able to move the blocking operations and queue requests and keep your "main" worker threads from blocking, jdbc is synchronous. At some point, somewhere, there's going to be a thread blocking waiting for a response. It's frustrating to see so many folks hyping this and muddying the waters. Unless you write your own client for a dbms and have a dbms that can multiplex calls over a single connection (or using some other strategy to enable this capability) db access is going to block. It's not impossible to make the calls completely async, but nobody's built it yet. Yes, I know ajdbc is taking a stab at this capability, but even IT uses a thread pool for the blocking calls (be default). Someday we'll have async databa
Read more

The difference between Scalability, Performance, Efficiency, and Concurrency explained

-
I thought I'd give some explanation of the difference between scalability, performance, Efficiency, and concurrency. To make things more accessible (and because I'm watching a cooking show on TV) I'm going to use a baking metaphor to help explain the differences. In our case, the system in question is baking cookies for consumers. Scalability, is how well something responds to adding more resources. If we can double our capacity by doubling the number of resources, we've got linear scalability. In our baking example, if we add more ingredients, we can scale to a larger number of cookies. To contrast with our other metrics, this doesn't actually increase the performance of creating a single cookie (they still take 10 minutes to bake), and the efficiency is the same (we just have more capacity). We also cannot bake more cookies in a fixed time period, but over a larger time period we can produce more cookies. Performance is how fast something can get done, u
Read more