No Ownership Leadership Analysis
Ownership leaders make the group far better by the time they finish their term. In contrast, No-Ownership leaders crave attention, live in their own fantasy world, and bring the team to its knees. When the team’s result in a project or effort is less than ideal, the Leader Takes:
No-Ownership of the Result Ownership of the Result
Disown the Reality
“I am a great person. It must be my team’s fault.” Own the Reality
“I led this team. I Own this result.”
Disown the Role as Communicator:
“My team is lousy.”
Goes on to harangue the team. Own the Role as Communicator:
“This is not good. I had better go find out.”
Consults team for their opinions.
Disown the Learning from this experience:
Morale slides, the next result is even worse. Own the Learning …show more content…
Records from that time, such as the Chronicles of the Second World War, report his repeated outbursts of deluded grandeur. He had No-Ownership of reality: Countries would not keep surrendering themselves to him for nothing, but that did not stop him making impossible demands. His greed was made even worse by leaders of other countries whose reactions were based on No-Ownership of reality: for example, the failed appeasement attempts of then-Prime Minister of Great Britain, Neville Chamberlain, and others. In so doing, they fed his Refusal of …show more content…
Advisors who disagreed or were potential threats were dismissed or fired; some, like the military genius Rommel, were murdered even whilst Germany was facing defeat. Hitler constantly argued with his generals, took away their resources, and when he finally took all power into his own hands, Germany crumbled even more quickly. Lastly, whilst in the middle of war with Great Britain with whom he had achieved a standoff, he decided to attack Russia without considering the limitations of his army and the size of Russia. Hitler even welcomed the news that the United States of America, then the world’s most powerful economy, had joined in the war against Germany.
Adolf Hitler had allies, Benito Mussolini of Italy and Emperor Hirohito of Japan. They too subscribed to No-Ownership speech and behaviour, as evident by historical records. They were likewise defeated when the reality of tactics and economics won out over wishful
No-Ownership of the Result Ownership of the Result
Disown the Reality
“I am a great person. It must be my team’s fault.” Own the Reality
“I led this team. I Own this result.”
Disown the Role as Communicator:
“My team is lousy.”
Goes on to harangue the team. Own the Role as Communicator:
“This is not good. I had better go find out.”
Consults team for their opinions.
Disown the Learning from this experience:
Morale slides, the next result is even worse. Own the Learning …show more content…
Records from that time, such as the Chronicles of the Second World War, report his repeated outbursts of deluded grandeur. He had No-Ownership of reality: Countries would not keep surrendering themselves to him for nothing, but that did not stop him making impossible demands. His greed was made even worse by leaders of other countries whose reactions were based on No-Ownership of reality: for example, the failed appeasement attempts of then-Prime Minister of Great Britain, Neville Chamberlain, and others. In so doing, they fed his Refusal of …show more content…
Advisors who disagreed or were potential threats were dismissed or fired; some, like the military genius Rommel, were murdered even whilst Germany was facing defeat. Hitler constantly argued with his generals, took away their resources, and when he finally took all power into his own hands, Germany crumbled even more quickly. Lastly, whilst in the middle of war with Great Britain with whom he had achieved a standoff, he decided to attack Russia without considering the limitations of his army and the size of Russia. Hitler even welcomed the news that the United States of America, then the world’s most powerful economy, had joined in the war against Germany.
Adolf Hitler had allies, Benito Mussolini of Italy and Emperor Hirohito of Japan. They too subscribed to No-Ownership speech and behaviour, as evident by historical records. They were likewise defeated when the reality of tactics and economics won out over wishful