Leadership impact is measured in absence
Building strength that outlives us
Most of us think we will be measured by the results that we produce when we are at the helm. if results are good, we are good leaders, but if results are not delivered, we are not good.
I recently read an interesting article and one line in that article really made me think.
“Welch built a company that performed exceptionally well while he was in the room. He did not build a company that knew how to perform without him.”
You can read this article on this link:- (article is by Malcolm Gladwell)
Malcolm Gladwell is one of the most amazing minds and writers, and his book David and Goliath is one of my favorite reads. Malcom is someone who can provide interesting contrarian viewpoints. This article on Jack Welch was really interesting take on what we consider as success in leadership. Jack Welch, for those who don’t know, is considered one of the greatest business leaders in the world.
Here is a summary:-
Welch Era – Exceptional Performance
- Most successful leaders of corporate America.
- He led for 2 decades and transformed GE from Grew from $14 billion to over $400 billion. Briefly making GE most valuable company in the world
- Delivered a historic 80 consecutive quarters of earnings growth
During his time at GE, the success showed a a perfect example of leadership excellence.
After Welch. Performance Suffered
- By 2024, GE ceased to exist & the company was broken into three independent entities
- GE’s stock lost nearly 90 percent of its value from its 2000 peak to its 2020 low. y
- In 2018, GE was removed from the Dow Jones Industrial Average
After Welch stepped down, his successor struggled to keep the company on growth track.
Experts commented that his successors inherited a company that looked strong but was structurally fragile.
The Core Criticism
- Welch optimized for present performance, not future resilience.
- He engineered numbers more than the business. eg. GE Capital was used to smooth earnings when industrial units underperformed. The results were legal, but artificial.
The illusion of stability collapsed once his personal oversight was gone.
What This Means for Us – learnings for us to think over
My article is not about Jack Welch or GE. They are too big and too distant. This is more about middle managers who run countries, functions, and businesses today.
We can implement the following learning to deliver a performance that will last beyond us.
1. Deliver Today While Deliberately Building Tomorrow
Focus on building the future. However, at the same time, there is no excuse for weak current performance in the name of the future.
Spend time on thinking about strategy, planning.
- Execute current business with discipline
- Build pilots, processes, and platforms for what comes next
- Build Systems & processes that can survive beyond people & their biases to build institutional knowledge.
Institutionalise knowledge through systems, documentation, and repeatable processes and focus on the future while delivering the present
2. Succession Is About Future Needs, Not Past Success
One of the common mistakes that organisations do is replacing a successful leader with someone similar in skills, attitude those of like predecessor.This often fails as organizations evolve. The skills required at different stages also change.
- Rebuilding phases need hands-on operators
- Scaling phases need delegators and system builders
Succession planning must be about what the business needs next, not what worked last.
3. Anchor Culture to Principles, Not Personalities
When culture or success depends on a single leader’s presence, it is fragile. we need to focus on building value and enforcing them through Governance & Incentives. If culture or performance needs you in the room, it is not culture/or performance system. It is control.
Building Strength That Outlives Us
Leadership is not proven by how well things work when you are present. It is proven by how well they work when you are gone.
Let’s ask ourselves honestly –
Are we building or running something that can grow without us?
Or are we simply managing numbers to protect our reputation?
The first is leadership.
The second is just expensive management.
