10/28: Leaders have appropriate operational understanding of their business

I realize that a phrase such as “appropriate operational understanding” is a qualitative term in need of some sort of qualification for more direct meaning. I also realize that leadership has failed as a consequence of not having “appropriate operational understanding” of the business being led.

Either too much or too little operational understanding tends to lead toward micro-management—the former as a consequence of the “we have always done it this way” attitude and the latter as a consequence of having to become overly involved in processes in an effort to acquire sufficient understanding to be comfortable with high-level decisions. Micro-management also results from the reverse of a very popular adage: Those who can’t teach … do. Leaders with appropriate operational understanding of their business are better mentors and work well in the teacher-becomes-learner-then-teacher paradigm.

There is, then, an appropriate medium. For the sake of proper quantification, on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is no operational understanding of the business at hand and 10 is immense understanding, a leader should be in the 4 to 6 range. And a great true leader will choose confidants, directors, and associates that clearly fill in gaps on both sides of this mid-range.

I turn to baseball managers as a prime example. For years, it has always interested me that the most successful baseball managers are typically drawn from the ranks of the marginally successful baseball players. To substantiate that observation, I researched the careers of the 15 managers currently in the Baseball Hall of Fame. Not one had a playing career worthy of the Hall of Fame.