Let me make this perfectly clear: This is a leadership blog. Not a political pulpit. The purpose of this post is to examine the value of coachability in leadership. I believe this year’s Presidential Debates provide insightful examples and food for thought for leaders of all kinds. I have no political agenda.
I believe two important criteria are in play when selecting a political candidate.
Every voter has their own values for measuring the importance of both issues and credentials. We can agree that both are important for voters.
In the June 20214 debate with Donald Trump, President Joe Biden’s performance influenced party leaders to question his credentials. Concern over President Joe Biden’s age-related capacities became such an issue that he withdrew from the ticket.
Most analysts agreed that Vice President Harris held her own and didn’t hurt her candidacy. In contrast, former President Trump did little to help his cause.
Observers concluded that Ms. Harris was well-coached which contributed to her debate performance.
In order to be “well-coached”, you need to be coachable. Here’s one definition:
“Coachability is the ability to be open to learning and improving from feedback and instruction. Coachable people are receptive to criticism, adaptable, and have a growth mindset. They recognize that they can benefit from the guidance of others and are willing to change for the better.
– Kan Tang
Why is this Important?
I admit the second item exhibits a coach’s bias with a leading editorial question. Not to influence your vote but for your own leadership growth.
Woodrow Wilson
“I not only use all the brains I have but all that I can borrow. “
Tom Lemanski helps accomplished leaders unlock potential, solve complex challenges, and amplify their impact.
Effective leadership is the key to driving meaningful, lasting success in a fast-changing world.
Tom’s focus on innovative strategies and self-awareness creates transformative results for leaders striving for the next level.
Powered and secured by MailChimp
One Response
Very provocative. If a leader is not coachable is this a early warning he/she is not likely to elicit information to make sound decisions?