Sometimes I think labels are a bad thing. For example, I realized the other day I'm not homophobic–I'm just not a fan of PDA, and I'm not a fan of kissing boys. It's the same way you might be grossed out when I eat my corn flakes with water. Is it gross? Not at all to me, but you might think so. Does that make you a corn-flakes-in-water-phobe? Well, not the negative connotations currently in use with the term.
Another one I realized I don't like is "you have a problem with authority figures." I think that title fits me pretty decently, I'd just tweak it slightly: I have a problem with authority figures who are doing a fantastically terrible job.
Take this morning, for example. I had two notable experiences. The first (actually, it happened second, but I want to bring it up first) was a call from StubHub. Recently, I purchased two relatively-expensive tickets from one Andy T for an upcoming concert. Andy sent me 4 tickets instead, and I was thrilled because at half price they were almost reasonable. StubHub called last week with the old "Andy sent you the wrong number of tickets. Can you send them back?" I acquiesced, of course, since I'd hate to be out two great tickets myself. But...I was at my brother's wedding in another state and I didn't get around to it. This morning, StubHub called me again. The conversation went something like the following:
StubHubGuy: I noticed you haven't sent the tickets yet.
me: Yeah. I've been out of town.
StubHubGuy: Well, you know that if you don't send them, we might charge you full price for the other tickets.
me [here's where the "authority issues" came out]: I actually am only sending the tickets because I'm honest. There is nothing in the StubHub agreement that says you can charge me double. I don't take kindly to threats.
StubHubGuy [now backpedaling cause I didn't lay down]: Well, I didn't say we were going to charge you double, just that we might.
me: I think we're done here.
I don't think that's issues with authority, is it? Maybe I was a little testy because of a carillon issue that cropped up the night before, but "issues with authority"? He was clearly doing a fantastically terrible job, and I was not in the mood to put up with it.
The second experience actually has been spanning several days now. Our delightful Guild of Student Carillonneurs has been growing quite nicely for a few years, but the President/Dictator of the Guild (he actually named the typical "vice president" office the "deputy director." Serious? Are you looking for a fight? Do you need a deputy to police our little 9-member club?) has been growing restless. Just last week, he sent out an email to the Guild that "the inability of recently-inducted Members to fulfill the specified duties of membership...makes those inductions incompatible with the Guild's new Constitution and the mission of the Guild." Which means that all of the members but himself and me are either kicked out, or graduated. Including the former Cornell Head Chimesmaster who's doing a PhD in Arabic studies at UT. Are you catching the "fantastically terrible job" here? This is a perfect case of ex post facto, and an even better case of abusing it to nobody's benefit.
Needless to say, I sent him the following email. (I spent a good deal of research time on it, but I thought it turned out pretty good, don't you?)
You've made a couple of bad decisions recently, but they're decisions you've made nonetheless, and some of them are impossible to reverse. Right now, though, you have two paths ahead of you: that of the mediocre man, or that of a true leader. Let me describe them for you.
Your first choice is the choice of the mediocre man. It is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority (as they suppose), to immediately begin to exert unnecessary dominion. It is the nature and disposition of almost all men to undertake to cover their mistakes, continually heaping on poor decisions. When one wrong decision leads to another, instead of taking responsibility and admitting fault, the mediocre man takes the coward's way out, finding excuses for what they've done or allowing others to take the blame for them. They will not admit fault, because fault is a sign of weakness and the mediocre man does not believe weakness should be expressed. They may some day become a great politician, but they will not be successful. And always, always, their organizations are filled with pettiness, back-bighting, and a general poor sense of morale.
On the other hand, you may choose the path of the true leader. While this path might be harder in the beginning, it will be so much worth it in the end. The true leader does not seek to gratify his pride or his vain ambition, he does not seek to hide his faults or cover his wrong choices, and places the desires and needs of his constituents before that of his own. This path will require you to admit that you were wrong, to offer apologies where necessary, and to mend bridges you have burned. While it might be tough for you in the beginning, the Guild as a whole will be much stronger because of it. No true member of the Guild will care about power, because no true lover of music would care about anything but playing the instrument they love. If you're a good leader, you'll demonstrate this by example.
[Name withheld to protect the "innocent"], I'm hoping you'll make the right choice. I'm hoping for the Guild's sake you'll choose the path of the true leader, but I'm also hoping for your own sake. If not, the School of Hard Knocks has several tough lessons for you yet to learn.
As a wise man has said, I seek not for power, but to pull it down. I seek not for the honor of the world, but for the satisfaction personal gain can bring. I seek not for the praise of men, but for the betterment of the Guild. Let's all have the same goals in mind.
![]() |
The carillon is located at the top of the famous UT tower, just above the clocks seen on all sides. |
No comments:
Post a Comment