Monday, November 26, 2012

Why Intimidating Leadership Doesn't Work

Donald Miller:
A couple weeks ago Mike Leach, the head coach of Washington State’s football team was in hot water again. His star wide receiver left the team claiming that Leach and his staff used tactics of humiliation and intimidation to gain control of their players. This wasn’t the first complaint against Leach. Only a few years ago he was fired from Texas Tech for allegedly locking a player in a closet. In leaving Texas Tech, Leach simply called that player a wimp.

It’s doubtful coach Leach will last long at Washington State. Both the school and the PAC12 are investigating his tactics now. Regardless, he can’t seem to keep his emotions in check. But his failures bring up another issue I think is important for people of influence. And it’s this:

If you have to intimidate in order to gain control, the people you’re leading don’t respect you.
Read the rest.


Jeremy Larson said...

I'm interested in the difference between discipline and intimidate, especially regarding God's "tactics." When God kills people, demands obedience, etc., is He being intimidating in a bad way? What about human governments that tell other governments that if they continue their genocide, they will be taken out?

Vitamin Z said...

Probably different on a one to one personal level.

sara said...

I think there is a difference between discipline and consequences. Discipline means that a change of behavior (and heart) are the goal.

A consequence is just a fact. If you do such and such, you will go to jail. It's not a deterrent or a discipline so much as a method to keep you from hurting other people.

I think there's a difference too between God's discipline or chastisement of his children and his judgement of his enemies. They are two different things, though perhaps we have trouble seeing that from our tiny perspective.