No matching fragments found in this document.
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 3 NOVEMBER 1966
Remimeo
ADMINISTRATIVE KNOW-HOW
LEADERSHIP
Leadership is one of the most misunderstood subjects in Man's
dictionary. But it is based almost solely on the ability to give and
enforce orders.
An order or directive is necessary to bring about coordination of
function and activity without which there could be disagreement and
confusion.
In an organisation there is more than one person functioning. Being of
comparable rank and having different purposes (hats) they can come into
conflict and disagreement in the absence of a plan or order or directive.
So, without orders, plans, programmes, one does not have an organisation.
One has a group of individuals. We see in earlier policy letters that a
group composed only of individuals cannot expand and will remain small.
Oddly enough, such a group will also remain unhappy. It will have a low
affinity with the public and each other and if you know the Affinity-
Reality-Communication triangle, you will realise that all three points drop
if one does. Agreement being the basis of Reality, you will find a group of
individuals will disagree with each other and have a low Reality on what
they are doing or what to propose and even what to do.
Most people confuse a "taut ship" with a harshly led ship. Actually
harshness has nothing to do with it. The right word is positiveness.
If a group is led by someone whose programmes and orders are very
positive, then the group has a chance of going into agreement with one
another and so their Affinity improves and so does their Communication and
Reality.
So if one issues no orders, q group will remain a group of individuals,
out of agreement with each other, will do little and will remain small or
at least nonexpanding.
Bill, of equal rank to Joe, cannot give an order to Joe nor vice versa.
Thus no orders exist between them. Occasional agreements do occur but as
their jobs are different, they rather tend to disagree on what is
important.
A person with a senior standing to both Bill and Joe can give the two an
order and this becomes the basis of an agreement.
The order doesn't even have to be liked by Bill and Joe. If they follow
it, they thus "agree" to it and being in agreement on this they get Reality
and Communication on it as well.
Even poorly thought out orders angrily given, if issued and enforced,
are better for a group than no orders at all. But such orders are the low
end of the scale.
Positive, enforced orders, given with no misemotion and toward visible
accomplishment are the need of a group if it is to prosper and expand.
The group is full of "good fellows". This does not give it success. The
group is full of plans. These do not give it success.
What it needs are positive orders leading to a known accomplishment.
Many obstacles can exist to that accomplishment but the group will
function.
We call it "leadership" and other nebulous things, this ability to
handle a group, make it prosper and expand.
All leadership is, in the final analysis, is giving the orders to
implement the programme and seeing that they are followed.
One can build this up higher by obtaining general agreement on the how,
why and what of programmes. But to maintain it there have to be orders and
directives and acceptance or enforcement thereof-else the group will fall
apart, sooner or later.