The Leader

When I went to see the Utopian Analyst for his findings on my last post, he said to me, "Mr Hobbes, your posting raised more questions than it answered, not least for me. What I would like to know is what qualities a handsome, hunky and wind-swept officer such as you needs to possess in order to bring the best out of his officers?" After politely refusing his offer of a romantic meal together, I actually spent some time considering what qualities a good leader should have. Whilst I could not disagree with his observations that I am an extremely attractive man, I've never sat down and actually thought, "Am I a good leader? What do I need to do to inspire my officers to go that extra mile?" I've come to a conclusion of sorts below, but I'm not saying that I either personally possess or display these qualities. Maybe I should, maybe there are learning points within this post that I can take and apply to my team. Maybe the serving officers, retirees and public who commented on the last post can add more?

I did actually begin thinking about this last week, when I read of the death of Lieutenant-Colonel Rupert Thornloe in Afghanistan. What struck me about this was not that questions were asked why a commanding officer should have been at the front-line in the first place, but that he was commended by all for standing shoulder-to-shoulder with his men, experiencing what they experience. Defence analysts said it was vital for such a high ranking officer to be with his troops taking the same risks. Chris Keeble, an officer during The Falklands Conflict, further said, "We lead from the front. The death of a commanding officer is no less or more of a tragedy than the death of a private soldier." Are you already thinking that these are the kind of men that you would follow? I am.


Already, it is apparent that a good leader should - at times - be visible when routine is the norm, but be a constant presence when an incident is critical. I literally like to take a back seat for most of the tour rather than patrol alone. I'll sit in one of the vehicles with the PC's when nothing much is happening. It's not so I can keep an eye on them, but rather to see what they have to deal with and to get to know them a bit better. If a Critical Incident does come up, that's when I take control. I'll make the decisions and explain later, there's not always time when responding to an urgent development. If the need arises and I'm present when the danger is increased, then I'll be the first to deal with it ahead of my PC's. It's not that I doubt their ability, but if my decision to react increases the danger, then I'll be the one to take the brunt of it.

I initially caused a bit of a stir with the Sergeants when I joined my response team. I told them that on the occasions when there are two of them available to patrol, that I don't want to see them patrolling together. I want to see them either in separate vehicles or patrolling with PC's. I would also wander through the custody suite at two in the morning, and if there were no prisoners, I'd get one of the Sergeants out to patrol and supervise. The PC's don't have the luxury of taking it easy when nothing much is going on. They still have to patrol, be proactive, and show a visible presence. Why shouldn't a Sergeant do the same? "Lead by example" are the words of advice I always give and live by.

So, I'll be the first through the door at the beginning of the tour to prepare my team, and I'll be the last to leave at its conclusion. If my officers are unable to take refreshment breaks due to the volume of calls we receive, then I won't have a break either and will go and answer calls also. I know some of my peers say I shouldn't do this. They say I should be there to maintain an overview. I disagree. Hog Day Afternoon, one of the most enjoyable blogs I read, provided me with an example that highlights my own personal view.



General Bill Slim, when leading a retreat through Burma during the war, came across his men lying in a jungle clearing. They were in a bad way, clearly demoralised. Then he saw why. He saw his officers making themselves a bivouac. They got this aspect of leadership wrong, in my view at least. They may have thought they were setting an example to the men that, even though they were equally exhausted, they were demonstrating that extra fortitude to build proper protection for themselves from the elements. What they should have done, I would argue, was to go amongst the men and to assist them in building their bivouacs, leaving their own until last.

As General Slim commented, "Officers are there to lead. I tell you therefore, as officers, you will neither eat, nor drink, nor sleep, nor smoke, nor even sit down until you have personally seen that your men have done those things. If you do this for them, they will follow you until the end of the world". For General Slim, discipline begins with the leader and spreads downwards. Genuine teamwork begins when everyone does more than is required of them. He quotes Napoleon Bonaparte, who said, "There are no bad soldiers, only bad officers".

Okay, so I'm not a soldier or a general. However, if you look at your own bosses in any sphere of work you've undertaken, you should be able to see which qualities from the above that they possessed. They either inspired you to work harder, or you determined to do as little as possible to help them achieve their goals. I've worked for both types. I think I've learned from it.