Sacrifice, unchecked, is not a virtue

1. The biology of stress interests me: seems that overdoing stress robs people of the very qualities that probably make them good leaders in the first place--the ability to stay positive, the ability to learn, and the ability to think creatively: “Under stress, not only does the brain shut down and lessen our ability to function, it also loses capability to learn. . .

. . . we have an increased tendency to . . . perceive things that people say or do as threatening or negative. . . . Our bodies, minds, and emotions lose resilience and creativity. . . (43) Sacrifice, unchecked, leads to less effective leadership and dissonance” (44).

Yes, yes, yes. The imperative of moderation.

2. I'd like to talk about the challenges of giving and receiving honest feedback--really at many levels. Even Boyatzis and McKee seem a little conflicted on the issue. On the story of Karl, in “Chapter 4-Dissonance is the Default” they write, “He decided to share a piece of his mind with the board and wrote a scathing letter criticizing the political environment at headquarters. He knew, of course, that he was violating a cardinal rule of business wisdom by putting such opinions in writing, but he no longer cared” (37).

Later, we read “. . . even when others can actually see that [leaders] are slipping into dissonance, it is unlikely that anyone will tell them the truth about what they see (60). . . and “Most leaders. . . are susceptible to CEO disease, so not getting enough, accurate, or timely information is a common problem” (61). I'm not entirely clear if the cardinal rule that Karl broke was providing blunt feedback, expressing his emotions, or putting any of this in writing. At any rate, it seems that people are reluctant to give their higher-ups honest feedback unless it is good because they fear reprisal, no surprise there! Yet the authors say such feedback is really important (and I agree). A complex challenge that doesn't get enough attention.