Relationship management: Mercedes chief Toto Wolff sets an example in F1

November 21, 2014

Formula One racing has compounded its problems this year by adding to competition between drivers racing within the same team. Toto Wolff of Mercedes has tried to address the dilemma for drivers Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg

The broader issue is that of competitive individuals who are expected to put aside personal ambitions for the greater good of the organization to which they are committed.

A universal social dilemma

This is a universal social dilemma. In various forms it has attracted considerable attention.

Just recently, the distinguished Ethnologist Edward Wilson revealed the intensity over the debate with dismissive remarks over the ideas of Richard Dawkins, particularly over altruism and the selfish gene hypothesis.

It may be relevant that Wilson has specialized in understanding the social life of the ant, a species in which individual interests of the many are utterly subordinate to the well-being of the whole colony. His work adds to understanding of Eusociality.

335px-Fire_ants_01

From Formicidae to Formula One

Meanwhile, back from ants to Formula One racing, a system has been deliberately designed to sustain interest in the competition between two drivers in each team through points earned in each race towards the driver’s championship. This captures the attention of the global audience. There is also competition among the teams, the constructors championship, which is based on the total points scored by both drivers. This is the measure which encourages financial support for the constructors.

The Dilemma compounded

The Dilemma for F1 has been compounded by several factors this year. The most obvious is the decision to award double points to the drivers of last race in Dubai. This rather crude decision was made inevitably with the approval of Bernie Eccleston whose grasp of unintended consequences of actions seems limited. He has recently accepted a stay out of jail settlement in the German courts.

These issues took place as more unintended consequences of the funding mechanisms forced two teams out of the competition facing financial meltdown.

For Mercedes, whose team had by far the most successful car this year, the dilemma was exacerbated the competition between the drivers Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg who will battle it out for first place in Abu Dabhi shortly. Mercedes has already won the constructors championship

A matter of relationship management

It was refreshing to read the mature approach shown by Toto Wolff.

Toto Wolff, Mercedes’ head of motorsport, has told both Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg that losing the world championship in Abu Dhabi next week will not be the end of the world for either of them.
The observation is likely to fall on deaf ears but Wolff has felt compelled to move into full man-management mode ahead of the final race of the season, the double-points decider at the Yas Marina circuit, and told everyone in the team to “buckle up” for a rough ride next week

“The aftermath is relationship management, which is important for the future,” he said. “But [in] the run-up [it] is important to maintain the balance, to maintain the respect between the two and to let it stay a respectful relationship.”

Points for the leadership championship

If there were a leadership championship with points awarded by Leaders we deserve, Toto Wolff would be this month’s winner. Bernie Eccleston would not get past the first qualifying session.

Attribution

Image of fire ants By Stephen Ausmus [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons


A Spectator’s View

October 12, 2013

William Thompson

Seven leadership stories from The Spectator, 14th September 2013, are annotated by guest reviewer William Thompson for Leaders We Deserve

Leadership in the Christian Church
Are universities the breading ground of non- believers? Richard Dawkins the academic atheist describes the post-Christian world at Oxford. It is rare to meet someone who is religious in academic life he proclaims. He is influenced by Steven Pink’s book which believes that ‘humans are just getting nicer.’

What world are they living in? Come to our universities from across the world and we will convince you that Christianity is a myth. Is the Country that played a major role in the spread of Christianity leading the world away from the faith that sustains millions of people across the world?

Lack of Leadership at the BBC
The huge pay offs being made by the BBC have led the Trust and the Executives to blame each other for the missuse of license fees. The leadership from Lord Patten seems not to be bad but non-existent. Lord Reith’s mission was to entertain and inform to enrich the experiences of license fee payers; Patten’s pension payments merely enrich senior executives at the expense of license fee payers.

World Leadership
John Kerry US Secretary of State has a major leadership role dealing with President Bashar al-Assad of Syria and the issue of chemical weapons. Kerry also refers to the difference in tone between Rouhani and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the President for 8 years who by his leadership caused Iran to be feared as a threat to civilisation across the world. Change of leader, change of tone.

‘As the leader of the football World I have decided not to decide..’
Joseph ‘Sepp’ Blatter aged 76 made a decision not to make a decision to move the 2020 World Cup from summer to winter. This is leadership of the highest order.

Silvio Berlusconi
The disgraced former prime minister of Italy was abandoned by five of his ministers plunging the government coalition into crisis. Has Berlusconi’s time as a significant leader come to an end?

Golden Dawn in Greece
In the news this week are four MP members of the neo-Nazi party who are charged with being members of a criminal group. Leadership of the wrong kind?

Jacques Rogge
Jacques Rogge 71 stood down as President of the Olympic Committee and was replaced by Thomas Back aged 59. Rogge is still younger than Blatter and Berlusconi. Can you be too old to be a leader?


Richard Dawkins re-interprets memes and offers a creative tautology

July 23, 2013

by John Keane

Just for hits

Rickard Dawkins continues his Odyssey in search of scientific truth against the forces of superstition. In the sponsored advertising video Just for Hits he raises interesting questions about the logic behind his reasoning

What lies at the core of this eight minute glossy video? Its title hints at it. At one level it is Just for Hits. That which is designed is designed for a purpose, he declares. If designs are fit for purpose, they survive and spread. He has already borrowed the metaphor of a virus. Concepts intended to spread are fit for purpose if they spread.

I rather like to concept of a meme spreading through imitation. It offers a description (but not necessarily an explanation) of the processes of cultural replication. I am the sort of person who likes to examine possible mechanisms in search of explanations. The principle behind a design, if you like.

The Darwinian principle of natural selection

The Darwinian principle of natural selection is a very satisfactory one which fits observations and permits predictive trials. I prefer it to other wide-range explanations, as does Professor Dawkins. The mechanism is elegantly captured in the notion of blind variation and selective choice.

‘As if’

At very least, I believe that blind variation and selective choice ‘works’ in the natural world. It offers what most scientists would consider a robust basis of an explanatory theory. Its scientific respectability can be examined in various ways. One way is to assess its success as if it describes what results in the variety of the world, the survival of genetic material or natural selection. It works as if the world operated according to its beautifully elegant principles.

The whiff of tautology

I am not the first to be troubled by a whiff of tautology in the way it is applied to explain just about observable aspect of biology (including leadership).

Many years ago, before I heard of Richard Dawkins, I asked a distinguished Professor of Cell Biology whether a gene was a material entity or a metaphor. He told me that was a good question, which I came to suspect was polite way of saying he would have trouble providing an answer.

For the hits

The whiff of tautology is stronger in the concept of a meme. The closest I get to understanding the memetic replicator is that humans have a deeply embedded inclination to imitate. Well, yes. So viral messages ‘go viral’ because they have something which triggers the imitative response.

Creativity

Dawkins suggests that creativity may be part of the story. He reinvents (or knowingly imitates) a mechanism for creativity examined by scholars such as Dean Simonton . Pithily, it is a version of the natural selection mechanism of blind variation and selective choice.

The ghost in the machine

Arthur Koestler was another deep thinker on the act of creation. He offered the metaphor of the brain as a machine, with creativity as the ghost in the machine. This recognizes the mysterious nature of the creative principle. Professor Hawkins has written about his own sense of awe at the evolutionary principle. Koestler would probably agree, although perhaps favouring the aha moment of creative discovery. [Another of Koestler’s classic books was called The Sleep Walkers which examines the way progress is ‘stumbled upon’.]

Acknowledgement

To Guardian journalist Andrew Brown who drew my attention to the tautology in his comment piece about Richard Dawkins’ ‘meaningless meme’.

[Dr John Keane writes on matters relating to leadership and the history of science. He teaches and researches at The University of Urmston.]


Dawkins re-interprets memes and offers a creative tautology

June 25, 2013

Reviewed by John Keane

Rickard Dawkins continues his Odyssey in search of scientific truth against the forces of superstition. In the sponsored advertising video Just for Hits he raises interesting questions about the logic behind his reasoning and the hint of tautology in that logic

What lies at the core of this eight-minute glossy video? Its title hints at it. At one level it is Just for Hits. That which is designed is designed for a purpose, he declares. If designs are fit for purpose they survive and spread.

He has already borrowed the metaphor of a virus. Concepts intended to spread are fit for purpose if they spread. I rather like to concept of a meme spreading through imitation. It offers a description (but not necessarily an explanation) of the processes of cultural replication. I am the sort of person who likes to examine possible mechanisms in search of explanations. The principle behind a design, if you like.

The Darwinian principle of natural selection

The Darwinian principle of natural selection is a very satisfactory one which fits observations and permits predictive trials. I prefer it to other wide-range explanations, as does Professor Dawkins. The mechanism is elegantly captured in the notion of blind variation and selective choice.

‘As if’

At very least, I believe that the concept captured as blind variation and selective choice ‘works’ in the natural world. It offers what most scientists would consider a robust basis of an explanatory theory. Its scientific respectability can be examined in various ways. One way is to assess its success as if it describes what results in the variety of the world, the survival of genetic material or natural selection. It works as if the world operated according to its beautifully elegant principles.

The whiff of tautology

I am not the first to be troubled by a whiff of tautology in the concept of natural selection. I struggle with the argument that ‘success’ in evolutionary terms arises because the successful are more equipped to succeed.
Many years ago, before I had heard of Richard Dawkins, I asked a distinguished Professor of Cell Biology whether a gene was a material entity or a metaphor. He told me that was a good question, which I came to suspect was polite way of saying he would have trouble providing an answer.

For the hits

The whiff of tautology is stronger in the concept of a meme. The closest I get to the memetic replicator is that humans have a deeply-embedded inclination to imitate. Well, yes. So viral messages ‘go viral’ because they have something which triggers the imitative response. Their purpose is to exist.

Creativity

Dawkins suggests that creativity may be part of the story. He reinvents (or knowingly imitates) a mechanism for creativity examined by scholars such as Dean Simonton. Pithily, it is a version of the natural selection mechanism of blind variation and selective choice.

The ghost in the machine

Arthur Koestler was another deep thinker about the act of creation. He offered the wonderful metaphor of the brain as a machine, with creativity as the ghost in the machine. This recognizes the mysterious nature of the creative principle. Professor Hawkins has written about his own sense of awe at the evolutionary principle. Koestler would probably agree, although perhaps favouring the aha moment of creative discovery. Another of his books was called The Sleep Walkers which examines the way progress is ‘stumbled upon’

Acknowledgement

To Andrew Brown who drew my attention to the tautology in his comment piece about Richard Dawkins’ meaningless meme.


A Brief history of leadership

October 21, 2007

glass_spiral_staircase.jpgLeaders and leadership continue to capture the public imagination. But there have been few attempts to trace the history of leadership to its earliest manifestations. What can be learned from the hard-wired behaviors of insects, the territorialism of reptiles, the disciplinary schooling of horses, and the social capitalism of chimpanzees?

This post [under development] is based on a presentation to Manchester Business School Alumni in October 2007. You can access the presentation entitled A brief history of leadership here, [accessed via my slideshare powerpoints. Be patient. It does load, in about 15 seconds from my PC! ].

The lecture sets out the case for learning about today’s leadership dilemmas by reference to animal behaviors. This is in some ways a well-trodden path since Desmond Morris reminded us of our kinship with other animals as a naked ape.

The approach has to beware the pitfalls of anthropomorphism (attributing human behaviors to other animals). These challenges have been examined by John Stodart Kennedy as the new anthropomorphism.

These scholars have continued the debate on instinctive behaviors that followed the work of pioneering ethologists such as Nikolaas Tinbergen and Konrad Lorenz.

Drawing on these sources, the lecture argues that our modern concepts of leadership draw on residual ancient forms. Furthermore, our shared concepts and folk-memories contribute to universal archetypes.

It is suggested that as humans, through consciousness and learning, we become and create ‘the leaders we deserve’

Other points of interest: By re-evaluating the role of instinct in behaviors that are considered to exhibit leadership qualities, we approach the ancient question of whether leaders are born or made.

To go more deeply

In preparing the lecture, I drew heavily on the work of Richard Dawkins, and particularly The Ancestor’s Tale.

Anyone with strong creationist beliefs will probably have problems with the Darwinist treatment.