On The Pursuit of Loyalty

The Trump Presidency has passed its first anniversary date and for a variety of circumstances I've written relatively little that relates to Donald Trump's style of leadership.  Certainly it's not because there has been a lack of material to draw from.  More truthfully, its probably been reflective of my general level of busyness and perhaps even an inability to settle on one topic or issue raised by Donald Trump's actions.  No doubt, as many of you who read my posts might rightly conclude there is a particular disconnect between Donald Trump's style and what I believe constitutes good leadership.

One subject that has had my attention for some time, albeit belatedly in the context of the past year, is the concept of loyalty. Perhaps most famously in this presidency we have had the public specter of Donald Trump allegedly demanding/expecting loyalty of then FBI director James Comey.  The issue continues to wend its way through due process, caught up in the Russia probe, and a host of other tweets and crises since first being reported.

Donald Trump, however, is not unique in the realm of "leaders" demanding loyalty from their subordinates.  I have been subjected to two powerful examples that mirror similar demands of "loyalty" from past leaders.  In one circumstance, my "leader" went so far as to demand a written/signed commitment of loyalty.  Some followers acquiesced.  Others did not.  Those that didn't inevitably found themselves isolated or "reintroduced to the marketplace".  I made a decision at that time to move on to greener pastures. I did, however, utilize this experience to positive benefit, being able to demonstrate, in contrary fashion, to my new team how I was not going to lead.  The prospect of looking for a written oath of loyalty astounded them.  That being said I'm sure many of them would have signed on to such a declaration if I had presented it.  They didn't know who I was and what values I worked by.  The power differential between them and I, and the desire for job security, likely would have made them swallow hard and sign.

A demand for loyalty doesn't have to come about in so blatant a fashion.  A second circumstance I experienced was as a consequence of being part of a 360 evaluation for one of my other "leaders".  There were at least seven of us subordinates at the senior executive table and we were asked to respond to a Board-managed, anonymous, evaluation process for our boss.  A pretty standard process.  As events would prove out, my senior executive colleagues and I operated from a similar belief system - namely that no one is perfect, no one warrants perfect scores, and there is always room for improvement.  Our CEO's actions upon receiving the results proved that they were operating from a different set of parameters and expectations.  Immediately upon receiving the evaluation results we were collectively subjected to one of the most resounding tongue lashings we had ever been on the receiving end of in recent memory.  The message was clear - similar responses and perspectives into the future, shared with the Board, would be met with swift, significant and unpleasant consequences on our part.  Our loyalty to the CEO was never to be in question again.  The evaluation process for the CEO was substantially altered thereafter - to chilling and inauthentic effect in future years.

In both circumstances - and for Donald Trump - the demand and push for loyalty ultimately engendered nothing of the sort.  While I can appreciate the expectation and desire for loyalty, demanding it and utilizing various forms of coercion (positive or negative) does not beget true loyalty, commitment or engagement.  At best they establish deference and compliance.  Or a "partnership" with one's leader that is more akin to a deal with the devil. How far can this leader advance my personal agenda?  At worst this power play, this coercive approach starts to foster group think - don't challenge the leaders perspective or facts.  You do so at your personal peril.  Best efforts are diminished and huge amounts of potential that could have come from fostering and leveraging the strength and diversity of a team are lost.

What's also clear, I hope, from these examples is that each of these leaders was not looking for loyalty or commitment to a bigger and broader cause.  They were looking for personal loyalty.  Again nothing wrong in hoping and working towards such a goal.  Great rewards can come from that type of relationship.  However, I'm suggesting that this kind of commitment only comes from a much deeper and more trusting relationship, based on common understanding and similarity of values, which also, more than likely arises from shared experience, where values and congruency with actions can be evaluated in both good and challenging times.

True loyalty is ultimately EARNED by the leader, not given or received via coercion.  The former approach results in lasting commitment and powerful opportunity.  The latter approach conjures up a mirage that is only visible to the leader demanding it.

Act with integrity, demonstrate a commitment to values that transcend personal gain, hold true to your commitments, speak and act in service of the truth, treat others fairly, and above all treat others with as much or more respect as you would expect or hope to be given to you.  I'm suggesting that this is a more constructive, rewarding and lasting path to creating the kind of loyalty you might crave as a leader.  Be an authentic leader and loyalty may be yours.  Play the role of tyrant and keep watch over your shoulder for displays of disloyalty.

The choice is yours.  It's all about leadership.
______________________________

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
Executive Coach/Consultant
BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions
780-250-2543

Helping leaders realize their strengths and enabling organizations to achieve their potential through the application of my leadership experience and coaching skills. I act as a point of leverage for my clients. I AM their Force Multiplier.