Lincoln on Leadership: Executive Strategies for Tough Times Paperback – February 1, 1993

Excellent read. I didn't read it in all in one sitting. I would pick this book up on days I was facing a difficult leadership decision and would read the chapter I was on and that chapter always seemed to be discussing exactly what I was facing as a leader.

Donald T. Phillips used our sixteenth president's wisdom under fire to provide an excellent primer for leadership focused on tough times, but it is as important during good times. When sales are at record levels, employees are happily working long hours, and new prospects are pounding on the doors because of customers' recommendations, are when one needs to be preparing for potential tough times.Few will go through the meat-grinder which faced President Lincoln, but able leadership during good times will give an organization a firm footing for the mishaps and misfortunes which will affect us all at some point. Focusing on the 'Endeavor' section of the book, Phillips illustrates examples of Lincoln's will, ability, and lack of hesitation in making tough, necessary decisions. Losing a war, being sniped at by those who should be supporters, and struggling with difficult family matters can be paralyzing, but ignoring a personnel issue so as to not rock the boat during a smooth voyage can also be destructive. Phillips points out how "Lincoln often accepted the aggravation and exasperation caused by subordinates if they did their jobs competently", but he also shows how Lincoln could be decisive and tough when his hand was forced. This includes disciplining and firing upper level staff such as cabinet secretaries and commanding generals.Any review of Lincoln's life would be incomplete without mentioning his use of humor and a unique storytelling ability to make his point. Phillips recounts Lincoln's reason for doing so, which includes these lines: "I often avoid a long and useless discussion by others or a laborious explanation on my own part by a short story that illustrates my point of view." "No, I am not simply a story-teller, but story-telling as an emollient saves me much friction and distress." Oh, if only more of our business and government leaders would use short stories, saving us all some "friction and distress".The chapter titled "Persuade Rather Than Coerce" explains that Lincoln was smart enough to know that he couldn't do it all by himself, but needed capable leaders who were authorized to make decisions and act on them. His largest problem with military leadership was a gauntlet of generals who were not willing to assume that responsibility. Understanding that influence is a more effective tool of leadership than coercion or orders, he "...preferred to let his generals make their own decisions and hoped that, through his suggestions, they would do the right thing."That chapter begins with a quote from the first Lincoln Douglas debate: "With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it, nothing can succeed. Consequently he who molds public sentiment goes deeper than he who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions". Looking back at the presidents of my lifetime, it is easy to see which have taken this advice to heart, and have shown success because of it. Likewise, those who have ignored it, and a recent president comes to mind, have had their leadership suffer.Paraphrasing John C. Maxwell, there is no such thing as `leadership during tough times'; there is only `leadership'. Those fond of history and anyone interested in leadership should read this book.

Valuable lessons that are worth revisiting over and over. Use it as a guide and a reference to reinforce what’s needed to navigate and inspire your “troops”.

There are a lot of things that I took away from this book regarding Lincoln's leadership...1) Lincoln had a *very* difficult situation handed to him, and was not widely recognized as a strong leader for much of his first term.-The country recently had a banking panic, thousands of business were failing, high unemployment, and government revenues were at all time lows.-The confederacy at the onset of the war was far more organized, had better leadership, and was much more willing to go to war than the North.-At the time Lincoln assumed office, he won a plurality of any candidate, but still a minority of the vote. Much of the union felt he was a 'second-rate country lawyer' and there was not at all the sense that he would go on to be a great leader.-Within his cabinet, and within military staff, from other senators, people were CONSTANTLY questioning his leadership. This was perhaps the most eye-opening. One of highest ranking generals even ran against him during his 2nd election.When you consider all of this, and the fact that Lincoln is consistently ranked as one of the top 3 presidents (very often as #1), it becomes much more clear that how things may seem at the time of a particular project or endeavor, is actually in no way related to good leadership.2) Though he was extremely honest, Lincoln was good at converting former rivals into allies, and found the best people for the job, regardless if they disagreed with him, or even were plotting against him.It seemed throughout the book as if almost everyone in his cabinet either questioned his judgement, or was actively considering running for president against Lincoln, or in some cases already had run against him.In particular, Lincoln is most effective in converting Seward (contender for 1860 Republican nomination) - who served as Secretary of State with distinction, and Stanton - who ran the War Dept. into close allies. He appealed to their sense of patriotism, and to the fact that he truly needed their abilities to succeed.In other cases like Gen. McClellan, and the Secretary of the Treasury - Chase, he used their abilities for as long as was viable, and when their differences were truly insurmountable, and hindering the larger efforts for the war, he got rid of them. Though honest, he was strategic in his use of people to accomplish objectives. Lincoln seemed to understand people very well.3) Provide objectives, not orders.Lincoln would provide overall objectives to this staff, rarely did he issue direct orders. He did not micromanage, and encouraged autonomy within certain limits. In some cases however, when generals would overstep their bounds (i.e. declare martial law when not necessary, or shoot young deserters), Lincoln would intervene and directly countermand their orders.Lincoln would actually imply or suggest certain broad courses of action, and allow his staff to figure out the particular implementation necessary to succeed. He understood how to delegate just the right amount of responsibility. The corollary to this, is that he was also good at picking the right people when delegating.4) In the face of intense criticism, Lincoln didn't lose his cool.Lincoln rarely acted out of anger, even when situation warranted an angry response (i.e. when certain generals failed to respond to direct orders to engage the Confederacy's armies), nor did he take much the criticism from the press or other politicians too closely. There are numerous letters he wrote but never sent to allow himself to 'cool' down.5) Lincoln understood strategyUntil Grant, it seemed as if none of the Union's generals had an understanding of war strategy and what was necessary to win. Somehow, though inexperienced, Lincoln seemed to grasp the key aspects of winning a war against the South (i.e. controlling the Mississippi, blockading the South, engaging the enemy directly in battle, and capturing Lee's army). A key episode covered in the book is when Meade wins the battle of Gettysburg, and has the opportunity to attack Lee's armies, who are trapped on one side of the Potomac. Lincoln is furious that Meade lets Lee get away.At the time of his presidency, Lincoln went through countless generals, before he was able to rely on Grant. He is able to recognize talented generals from non-talented ones fairly quickly (by learning himself about war), and re-adjusts accordingly.The book lists a graph showing his top staff, and he went through a management / organizational change almost every 3-4 months or so until he finally promoted Grant as his chief general. Most historians would agree that his previous generals were not doing a good job.6) Lincoln was an excellent orator and writer, and was effective at communicating a vision.The speeches are the one aspect of Lincoln that are often captured in your standard history books. They are still studied today.Overall the book was good. I haven't read about the specifics of Lincoln's presidency in any depth before, and I learned a lot regarding his leadership style. Some drawbacks though is that at times the writing is greatly oversimplified, making a general leadership tenet from one very obscure anecdote about Lincoln.Also, the author is not critical at all of Lincoln, and never once points out a mistake. Surely Lincoln made some mistakes during the war and his tenure in office, and at least writing from a more impartial standpoint would have been helpful.The book is very well researched, and draws heavily from letters, writings, and other historical accounts.Mostly, I learned to appreciate the incredibly difficult situation Lincoln inherited, from the moment he was first inaugurated to when he was assassinated, new problems constantly emerged. As a result of reading this book, I would be much more inclined to read something like Goodwin's Team of Rivals, which may fill in much more of the historical record.