Leadership and the Human Stain
Wired Magazine recently posted an interesting profile of Getting Things Done author David Allen. A similar profile ran in Business 2.0 over the summer. The pieces detail a history of drug abuse and addiction, mental breakdown, drifting, and divorce, before Allen eventually encountered the spiritual leader John-Roger, the Mystical Traveler, and began assembling the philosophy that would come to stand as the core of GTD.
While there’s little in GTD that’s explicitly cultish (despite the Wired article’s title, which calls GTD Allen’s “cult of hyperefficiency” — a representation the article itself goes to pains to dispel), the connection between Allen and John-Roger causes some people a great deal of concern. For them, Allen’s sullied past and spiritual leanings are marks against him.
Not to me. In fact, reading about Allen’s difficulties coming to terms with his life and, ultimately, himself makes him seem more worth listening to, not less. I say this as a man without a spiritual bone in my body, someone with no great respect for those who offer salvation or Truth to the misguided and confused. In short, I say this as someone who is not impressed with Allen as a believer, but is still impressed with his work and the role he’s taken as a leader offering tools to empower others to deal with their lives.
In my first post here at lifehack.org, I wrote that “Leaders empower those around them” and this is the quality I admire in Allen. Knowing that he is, was, and will continue to be “only human” doesn’t diminish his leadership qualities; rather, I believe it enhances them. Too many would-be leaders assume a mantle of superiority, distancing themselves from their “mere” humanity with all the faults and weaknesses that implies. They hide their weaknesses, pretending to be above the trivialities of day-to-day life, and presenting a front of super-human strength and competence. These are the people who wear hairpieces and cap their teeth to avoid the impression of bodily imperfection and scoff at those of us who wear our hearts on our sleeves and worry over-much about the right thing to do.
There’s nothing empowering about this model of leadership, though — it’s leadership through fear and intimidation, through appeal to low self-esteem and insecurity, and it falls apart at the first sign of the so-called leader’s everyday humanity. Allen’s leadership is premised on something different; in interviews he comes across as humble and approachable, and in these profiles as eminently human. He has achieved the success he has attained not only in spite of his earlier failures but because of them — the failures are part and parcel of his success.
Knowing his story makes his advice and his work more real to me somehow — it’s the work of a man and not a god. It creates a leadership that is not bestowed from Heaven but the outcome of worldly living. It comes, that is, from a life much like mine — maybe not in the particulars (as far as I know, I’ve never been addicted to drugs or spent time in a psychiatric institution) but in the overall quality.
This kind of leadership is far more compelling to me than the model of leadership by brute strength. It is the kind of leadership practiced by someone like Mahatma Gandhi, who led the Indian people to independence from the British not by hiding his faults but by emphasizing them, by displaying them for the world to see. Gandhi understood well the importance of human frailty and built his strategy of nonviolent resistance around it. Knowing that his peaceful protests would be met by violence, Gandhi embraced the fragility of the human body — knowing that the brutality that colonial forces would inflict against unresisting protesters would hang heavy on the consciences of both the present attackers and the rest of the world witnessing it via the media. Throughout his career, Gandhi demonstrated the frailness of his own body and the tenuousness of life itself by embarking on hunger strikes, inspiring millions with his own humanity.
Or, to take an example from the opposite end of the moral spectrum, consider Bill Clinton who, regardless of what you thought of his politics or his morality, could make believers in a few moments of personal contact. Hunter S. Thompson, the drug-addled iconoclast and inventor-advocate of Gonzo reporting, a man who despised the politics of appeasement the Democrats arrived at over the span of the Reagan years almost as much as he despised the institution of organized politics altogether, still found himself admiring Clinton when he covered his campaign in 1992. Though he never learned to like Clinton’s centrist politics, he was compelled by Clinton’s very presence — not because of his strength but because of his weaknesses: the gusto with which he wolfed down his food, the womanizing and philandering that Clinton barely concealed, the squareness of his amateur sax-playing, the raw “humanness” of the man. America agreed, apparently; Clinton’s victory in New York clinching the Democratic nomination came hard on the heels of the revelation of Clinton’s affair with Gennifer Flowers. In contrast, George H.W. Bush (and later Bob Dole) was all too stiff and formal to be real.
The mark of human weakness is at the center of Phillip Roth’s novel The Human Stain, a meditation on human physical and, more importantly, moral frailty set against the backdrop of the Lewinsky Affair. For Roth, it is the “stain” of moral confusion, physical degradation, sexual and emotional need, and ultimately failure in every and any arena of life that marks us as purely and utterly human. And it is the reality of temptation, of moral misstep, of wrong turns and tortuous recovery that makes for true leadership, for leaders that lead by example and by sharing their unreserved humanity. That is the kind of leadership I see in Allen’s story, and it is the kind of leadership that a mere human like myself can embrace.


Comments
MS says on October 3rd, 2007 at 11:30 am
I’m a fan of GTD, but David Allen as a personality doesn’t factor into it one way or the other. GTD is a tactical approach which doesn’t go any deeper than “your mind works most effectively when you do x”. If there were a spiritual aspect to it, then David Allen’s spiritual leanings would be more relevant.
hleJAC says on October 3rd, 2007 at 3:23 pm
I agree with MS.
I’m a huge fan of GTD, but David Allen as a personality doesn’t factor into it one way or another, like MS stated.
Just as Einstein as a personality doesn’t factor into the relevance of E=mc² either.
The interesting part with Lifehacks and the Information Boom and GTD is how they can empower the user. How the control is (really) in YOUR hands. They should not/don’t establish leadership authorities or hierarchical structures. Or even symbols of leadership.
Dustin; Do away with all the romantic (nineteen century) notions of leaders and leaderships!
RisingSunn says on October 3rd, 2007 at 7:55 pm
Dustin,
I have to say I am very dispointed in this piece. It posses nothing but your personal opinion. And to me, at least, does nothing but say that you don’t like the stereotypical “leader”. It offers nothing to better the reader or reflect the very nature of this site.
Not to mention that some of the most famous leaders in history exibit the very characteristics that you disdain, but I digress.
carlos says on October 3rd, 2007 at 8:20 pm
wow.. this is pretty deep. just the kind of thing i would expect from a lifehack contributor. thanks, dustin!
uhhhh says on October 3rd, 2007 at 11:43 pm
Wow you ppl ripped off lifehacker.com, get something original already.
Dustin Wax says on October 4th, 2007 at 12:23 am
???????
Terri says on October 4th, 2007 at 1:26 am
I disagree with comments that David Allen’s personality and beliefs play no factor. I attended one of his 1-day workshops and his style electrified and inspired the audience. You could feel everyone responding to his passion. One can’t be passionate without convictions and one’s background and experiences come through in all of that. David influences through interviews, workshops and his own writing. Sure, one can follow just the base tactics, but David is showing how these tactics affect one’s entire life.
BWL says on October 4th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
Well, here’s 2 cents.
The point of Dustin’s piece has little to do with the virtues or failings of GTD. Dustin is talking about leadership. This is a topic of some interest to me as I am being asked to assume a leadership in an urban Christian church that is struggling with a transformation from being the leading church of the establishment to being a focal point of diversity in the city’s core.
It’s one thing to be efficient and another to do the right thing. For example, the SS was efficient.
I think Dustin is right on the mark about leadership. Whenever we endow our leaders with super-human qualities we are always disappointed. The real mistake, however, is to assume that not only is a leader inerrant but that we no longer have to take responsibility for our own actions instead simply following somebody else’s lead. We need to be empowered to act out our own truths.
This is what Dustin is getting at: a real leader empowers other. However, there remains the question of “doing the right thing”. Personally, I look to examples and teachings of the “leaders” of the past and in that case, wisdom that acknowledges human frailty is always a better guide.
In my own case, the humanity of Jesus allows me to connect with his teachings without getting tangled in the debate over his divinity. It is enough for me to recognize within my own soul the truth of human wisdom (from Jesus, Gandhi, King, or whoever) that says love and justice are the only way to our salvation on earth. And I’m happy to use GTD to organize myself and others to that end.
@Stephen says on October 4th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
Wow. I was planning on writing a post like this after I read that article. Now I don’t have to.
simon says on October 7th, 2007 at 9:57 am
To dismiss a tool because of connections between its creater and a cult is pretty silly. Its also an easy way to smear and author and their works.
An anti-cult organisation can become cultish on their own too. Finding any connection with a cult to be an implication of some conspiracy. So they feel they need to bring down an author.
Its sad that such works can’t be considered on their own. After all. Thats how you see past the inherit human weakness that often contaminate a creation. Remove the human.
mtts says on October 8th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
“To dismiss a tool because of connections between its creater and a cult is pretty silly. Its also an easy way to smear and author and their works.”
The second is true, the first isn’t.
Fact is David Allen evangelizes a technique for altering your perception of reality (as in “here’s a pile of work you have to do. and now it doesn’t look like such a big deal anymore, does it?”). For someone who does that, knowing wat his own perception on reality is, is pretty significant, I would say.
But then I’m biased against him somewhat. GTD works - I’ve tried some of it - but it does turn you into a mindless productivity robot, never questioning what gets thrown at you. And it’s the never questioning part that I find scary.
Steve M says on October 11th, 2007 at 12:48 am
Yes i agree, who wants to be a mindless robot that only Gets Things Done. What about you?
I’m currently writing a set of articles about NGTD (Not Getting Things Done)