Home » Business & Finance » Workplace Issues » Corporate Leadership vs. Corporate Lordship

Corporate Leadership vs. Corporate Lordship

© Ronald J. Rakowski CELS SPHR

On December 4, 1783, following the evacuation of New York City by occupying British troops under the command of Sir Henry Clinton, American comander-in-chief General George Washington met with many of his officers at Fraunces Tavern in the city to bid them farewell before beginning the his long trip home to Mount Vernon, Virginia. At that convocation, most of the officers present were drawn to tears as Washington bid them each a personal farewell.

Earlier in 1783, General Washington has confronted a group of his officers who were promoting armed coercion of Congress to settle their grievances. Rather than leading the revolt, Washington condemned their proposed action and admonished the officers to obey Congress. At the same time, he promised to do his best to address their complaints. After struggling to begin reading a message sent by a member of Congress, Washington dramatically reached into his pocket in search of a pair of glasses and offered an apology for his infimity by explaining, "Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country." His presence and reference to the physical problems resulting from his long service defused the crisis.

He had led them through almost six years of armed conflict, which began in 1775 near Boston and drew to a close following the surrender of British General Charles Cornwallis at the battle of Yorktown, Virginia on October 19, 1781. After the defeat of Cornwallis, Washington remained with his army until the 1783 evacuation of British troops from New York City. He resigned his commission on December 23, 1783.

Washington's voluntary retreat from a position of great power puzzled many in the newly created United States of America, some of whom wanted to crown him King George I, as well as many foreign potentates. In advance of Washington's resignation, Britain's King George III opined that if General Washington could give up power he would be the greatest man in the eighteenth century. Washington understood leadership. King George III only understood lordship.

Unfortunately, many of today's senior corporate executives, like King George III, practice lordship rather than leadership.

One only has to pick up a business publication to learn about the problems caused by corporate lords who put their own interests before the interests of shareowners and employees. Former chief executive officer L. Dennis Kozlowski and chief financial officer Mark H. Swartz, both of Tyco, are on trial in Manhattan's New York Supreme Court for improperly using corporate assets to enrich themselves.

The copyright of the article Corporate Leadership vs. Corporate Lordship in Workplace Issues is owned by Ronald J. Rakowski CELS SPHR. Permission to republish Corporate Leadership vs. Corporate Lordship in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.