Denial of Service Attacks are Blunt Instruments of Aggression

January 7, 2016

…Even if well-intentioned.

 A recent outage of the BBC website illustrates the unintended consequences of Denial of Service attacks. The hackers claimed it was a ‘practice run’ before attacks on global terrorist sites. Many millions of BBC website users have suspicions about the intentions and judgement of the perpetrators.

Read the rest of this entry »


Caroline McCall is early candidate for Leader of the Month

January 6, 2016

EasyJet’s Caroline McCall was appointed Dame in the New Year’s Honours list. Her latest honour is recognition for her services to industry as a business leader over a sparkling career

Most admired leader

Shortly before the award, McCall won recognition as ‘the most admired leader in Britain’.

According to the Telegraph [December 2 2015]:

The airline boss, who is one of just six female CEOs running a FTSE 100 company, is the first woman to secure the title in 25 years of the study, which is compiled by Management Today magazine.

“I hope that this will inspire more women, and that they will want to be in business and do it their way, be leaders of companies in their way,” said Ms McCall.

“Man or woman, it’s an honour to get an award like this. I’ve never underestimated how important it is to be a role model for women but I prefer to do that quietly rather than loudly.”

Easyjet and Earlier Achievements

Her new accolade draws on her success at building up the low-lost airline Easyjet, improving its customer services as well as profits. Her previous appointments have included CEO of the Guardian Media Group and membership of the boards of Tesco and the [then] Lloyds TSB.

LWD has followed her progress as a business leader in several earlier posts. A feature of her leadership style is considerable media skills. Listening to her in a radio interview in 2013 I was particularly impressed by a way of explaining her business without recourse to the business buzzwords that are written in to briefing documents by business schooled aides (OK, mea culpa on this one).

[Do send me your other nominations for January’s leader of the month. TR]

 

 

 


Why banning demagogues is not a good idea

December 30, 2015

Here are three people who were in the headlines recently, connected with proposals for banning the rights of others, or being banned themselves Tyson Fury 2008

Donald Trump

Katy Hopkins

Tyson Fury

Demagogues?

Hold off for the moment on whether these three people are demagogues. I want to concentrate on a different point.

Trump and Hopkins

Each of these individuals has attracted attention for widely-publicized views which have triggered strong emotional reactions for and against them and their advocates.

‘The Donald’ has skillfully drawn attention to his Presidential campaign. His views trigger reactions of all kinds from revulsion, humour, to wide enthusiasm towards some perceived as a strong leader. The most recent call for a ban on all Muslims from entry into the United States is for some bizarre, unworkable, unethical, and stupid.

Katy Hopkins has been recognized by Trump for her journalistic work supporting him against his detractors.

An illustrative example of the mutual admiration between them came in in a broadcast interview with the Daily Politics programme. It seems that in her newspaper column she uses Trump’s call to ban Muslims to advance an overlapping set of beliefs.

She concedes the proposed banning is unworkable, but maintains Trump’s heart is in the right place in trying to do something about what they both believe to address ‘the Muslim problem’.

Tyson Fury

Tyson Fury, newly crowned boxing champion has expressed himself in terms designed to hit the headlines by infuriating some groups he disparages. It is not clear whether he, unlike Mr Trump or Ms Hopkins, is attempting to manipulate the press or whether he is being used by them

Petitions pile up

One petition that gained support called for the banning of  Trump from entering the UK for his schemes to ‘deal with’ Muslims (ban them entry to the United States) and with Mexicans (ban them entry into the United States by building a very big wall).

Another petition wanted to ban Tyson Fury from being a candidate on the BBC Sports Personality of the Year.

Hopkins, in a somewhat frenzied TV interview, mentioned a third petition which she claims has been deliberately ignored through BBC bias because it showed support for Trump’s proposal of a ban on Muslims entering the United States.

The Case against banning: the unintended consequences argument

Where to begin? The pragmatic position is that any proposed ban should be scrutinized for unintended consequences. Metaphorically, ‘don’t turn him or her into a martyr’.

The Case against banning: The moral dilemmas

There are various ethical dilemmas to consider. Claims about depriving people of their human rights are rarely without dilemmas. Should the State exercise its right to kill killers?

Or silence those opposed to free speech for security reasons.

The right to give offense

Another thought-provoking idea. I you take freedom of speech argument taken to one of its less logical conclusions you find yourself supporting banning and restricting a fundamental human freedom of speech to those who are believed to threaten a similar basic human right in others.

Think carefully, dear leaders, before supporting banning persons as a matter of principle.

 


Claudio Ranieri: The Tinkerman leads Leicester, Jose leaves Chelsea

December 27, 2015
Claudio Ranieri
Claudio Ranieri is a rare individual in the top reaches of football management He exudes amiability towards the world, combined with passion towards the game from the touch line.
He arrived in England in 2000 to coach Chelsea, a prestigious club, but, on sheer weight of trophies, one less successful over the years than  two heavyweights from the North West, Manchester United and Liverpool, and (as galling for local pride) their London Rivals, Arsenal.
Ranieri produces results
In a short period of time Ranieri produced results.  He took Chelsea to runner-up position, its highest level ever at the time, in the Premiership, To this he added a semifinal of the European Cup.  Only the most churlish fans of the ‘runners up are losers’ mentality could complain.  Mostly, the fans were delighted.  They were even able to enjoy Claudio’s relentless search for the best team, and his tinkering with starting positions which earned him his reputation as The Tinkerman.
His  less than perfect grasp of English and cheerful tone in press conferences added to his popularity.
Ranieri’s stay at Chelsea was about to be hit in the most radical change in fortune in the. Club’s history.  They were acquired by the Russian Multi-billionaire Roman Abramovich.  From the outset it was clear that Chelsea would buy the best players, pay the best wages, and, no secret, the best coach.
Abramovich hires Jose
An unsuccessful attempt was made to lure Sven-Goran Ericsson away from his post as manager of England’s national team.
Meanwhile, a young coach was making an impression on European football  with the Portuguese side Porto.  His name was Jose Mourinho. Porto won the European cup.  Abramovich hired Jose.  The Tinkerman left Chelsea.
The ironies of fate
A decade later, in December 2015, Ranieri took the unfashionable club Leicester City to the top of the Premiership.  Mourinho was at Chelsea for his second spell as manager there, with a team that was struggling  close to the relegation zone.
In one of those ironies of fate, Ranieri’s team faced Chelsea in December and won convincingly. A few days later, Abramovich sacked Jose Mourinho for the second time.
Sometimes, as football philosophers such as Justin Timberlake says, what goes round comes round.
Aknowledgements
[Extracted from ‘Mourinho Matters‘  (c) Tudor Rickards, to be published in early 2016]
With all best wishes, and thanks for your  support,  to my valued contributors and all those subscribers who clicked on LWD in 2015.

Jose Departs: Reflections on Perceptions versus Reality

December 24, 2015

I'll be backLeaders We Deserve subscriber Paul Hinks reflects on the departure of Jose Mourinho ‘by mutual agreement’ from Chelsea Football club

 

For the second time in recent history, Chelsea Football Club have parted company with their most successful manager of all time: Jose Mourinho. The leadership style of the self-proclaimed Special One invites closer inspection.

Mourinho has often been referred to as charismatic – but what happens when charisma is not enough? when the leader fails to take others with them?

The Reality of Success

By the time Mourinho had left Chelsea “by mutual agreement” on Thursday [17 December 2015]  Chelsea were just above the Premier League relegation zone. They had lost 9 games already in their latest campaign, compared with just 3 games in the whole of the previous season.

This was not the form of a team capable of successfully defending their title – indeed this was unchartered territory for Chelsea who had previously successfully challenged for both domestic and European honours under the ownership and guidance of Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich.

Chelsea’s lowly position in the Premiership table was unexpected. Most commentators struggled to explain how a squad of players could falter so spectacularly in such a short period of time.

Perhaps success was not a formality after all?

Big players, Big money, Big reputations

 

For those unfamiliar with football, Jose Mourinho reputation precedes him. He is a world class football coach who’s consistently delivered success at some of the world’s top football clubs.

This track record of success at different clubs provides some evidence to help validate opinion that ‘Jose’ is the ‘Special One’ – a man with some ‘magic mystical ingredient’ that helps delivers success.

With the big stage comes the big personalities and the challenge of managing big player egos – the dilemmas associated with player self-interest and hidden agendas – players and their agents who may want to engineer a lucrative transfer to another club to invoke lucrative sign-on fees?

Or perhaps footballers wives and girlfriends who would prefer to shop and live in a more cosmopolitan and glamorous city?

The footballing landscape manifests unusual and perhaps unique situations that can make the life very complex and adds unwanted pressure.

Power versus Leadership

Speculation and rumours of tensions in the Chelsea dressing room suggest Jose has had serious difficulties this season. was already on the back foot. The tipping point was the defeat that Mourinho and Chelsea suffered playing away to unlikely Premiership leaders Leicester City on Monday 14th December 2015 – ultimately a catalyst for Mourinho and Chelsea to part-company.

The Daily Mail provided insight:

When Jose Mourinho returns to work on Wednesday, he will be confronted by a group of grumbling Chelsea players who are far from happy with his scathing post-match analysis at Leicester City.

Mourinho’s use of the word ‘betrayal’ to describe John Terry and Kurt Zouma’s defensive lapse when Jamie Vardy scored in the 34th minute at the King Power Stadium stripped the dressing room of its dignity.

He has lost these players now, destroying their self-esteem in his criticism of the champions, either publicly or privately. It is a toxic dressing room now.

 

Mourinho’s standards are high. He expects the best from his players. During press conferences Mourinho has previously referred to his team, or individuals’ in his team, as ‘Champions’. An example of how Mourinho’s emotional intelligence is always engaged. Equally when things aren’t going so well, Mourinho’s style falters.

So when the results are not going his way so the inquiry and inevitable speculation starts in to what has gone wrong with the Special One’s charismatic ways?

Hero to Zero?

Mourinho’s very public clash with Dr Eva Carneiro was a critical moment in Mourinho’s 2015 Chelsea season and a good starting point for analysis.

The Telegraph was one of many news agencies that reported on how the Chelsea doctor had rushed on to the pitch to treat an injured Chelsea player (Eden Hazzard) when Chelsea played Swansea on 8th August 2015.

In the end, Dr Carneiro left Chelsea FC, but the damage was done. Mourinho’s misjudgement and mishandling of a single event was a pivotal moment in Mourinho’s recent period in charge.

What next for Jose?

Mourinho’s teams have consistently delivered success in silverware, the currency that fans and owners of football clubs crave most. for: silverware. Mourinho is a successful football coach in commercial terms. However, with continued success comes the increased weight of expectation. On closer inspection Jose also can be seen to leave behind a less than healthy legacy in  human terms.

But the signs are that Jose may be out, but certainly not finished. The words of another charismatic, come to mind. “I’ll be back”.

 


Has Zukerberg gifted Facebook away?

December 17, 2015

 Mark Zukerberg creates headlines with his plans for creating a philanthropic trust with a  donation of shares worth forty five billion dollars. Paul Hinks examines the story for Leaders We Deserve

The headlines were dramatic.  The BBC reported: “Zuckerberg to give away 99% of his shares”. The Telegraph and others carried similar headlines. Mark Zuckerberg and his wife have said they plan to donate 99 per cent of their shares in the social network to philanthropic efforts. Very commendable.

The stock, which is worth around $45bn, will be given to causes which “advance human potential and promote equality for all children in the next generation” Zuckerberg said in an open letter on his Facebook page. That’s an impressive and massive statement of intent by any measure.

The Future needs to be better than today

Philanthropy is about driving sustainable, lasting, positive change – it’s not just about fixing the symptoms; rather the focus is on the root cause. It’s about making a difference, about shaping our future – the future. Being proactive, not reactive. It maybe as simple as that.  Zuckerberg has had enough fun, and now prefers to throw his substantial financial weight behind efforts to the world’s problems.

The Guardian provides another perspective:

Philanthropy perhaps comes naturally to tech entrepreneurs, for whom the line between saving the world and doing business is often blurred. When Google announced plans, for example, to use its computing power to sequence the gene for autism, was it trying to help humanity, or expand its empire into the life sciences industry, or actually both? But if you add the Zuckerberg-Chans’ $45bn to the $34bn distributed so far in grants by Bill and Melinda Gates’ personal foundation then America’s new computing dynasties start to resemble not so much individuals as nation states: rich and powerful enough to shape all our lives, even more than their software has already done. Only a churl would sneer at the Gates Foundation’s contribution to almost eradicating polio, reducing preventable deaths among children under five and distributing anti-HIV drugs.

Massive donations of wealth

So well done Mr Zuckerberg – but there remains areas which require further clarification to avoid the skeptics from detracting from the well-intended claims that your motivations are all good.

The Japan Times made the poignant observation: Mark Zuckerberg promises to give 99 percent of his Facebook shares to charity — eventually.

Exact phrasing: the stock, currently worth $45 billion, will be donated “during [his and his wife’s] lives.” He’s 31 and she’s 30, so actuarial tables being what they are, by approximately the year 2065. If Facebook or the Internet or the Earth still exist. There’s also the suggestion of creative tax avoidance and why Zuckerberg has opted to structure the massive donation of wealth through a Limited Liability Company (LLC). To help clarify the decision Zuckerberg wrote in a Facebook post that it will enable Chan Zuckerberg to: “Pursue our mission by funding non-profit organizations, making private investments, and participating in policy debates — in each case with the goal of generating a positive impact in areas of great need.” – explaining that any net profits that resulted from these investments would go back into supporting this mission.

A plausible and valid response to the deeper questioning.

The Tradition of Giving 

At first I found  Zuckerberg’s pledge incredible. It has the potential to drive change and progress in so many different areas. Indeed, there is so much disparity in society, so many problems and complex situations to address.

Perhaps Zuckerberg does understand that he is merely the trustee of all that wealth (and not the owner), and that wealth can – and should – be used to for the welfare of all, and in particular the disadvantaged?

It would be helpful to provide a clearer indication of the goals – an agenda for change; some transparency around the end goal. Otherwise cynics will wait for evidence that Mr Zuckerberg is moving at least partly towards escape free from the shackles of the shareholders.


Sweet Caroline takes on a new meaning for Godiva and tennis star Wozniaki

December 14, 2015

 Caroline Wozniacki Godiva

 

Maria Sharipova and Maria Bartoli  are among the stars of women’s tennis who have shown their entrepreneurial talents.

Now it’s Caroline Wozniaki’s turn, partnering with Belgian luxury chocolate firm Godiva

Read the rest of this entry »


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,263 other followers