Good leaders take ownership of everything in their world
By: Kris Peeters
Tags: Software Development, Leadership, Jocko Willink

Last week, yet another political fight started in Belgium. You can read all about it here http://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20180719_03624520. But if you don’t speak Dutch or don’t have a subscription to that newspaper, let me summarize it for you: The Minister of Justice blamed the Minister of Migration that he made a mistake in sending back an Albanian criminal to his homeland, as he could’ve known that he was still awaiting trial in Belgium. I have no intention of discussing politics here, and I don’t care whose side you are on. But think about it for a while. It’s one Minister personally blaming another Minister in his own government for a mistake that could’ve been prevented. If you know Belgian politics a bit, this pattern has been going on since this government got started.

This is a perfect example of failed leadership, and not taking ownership of a situation. There are two kinds of leaders: those who relentlessly strive to reach the team’s objectives and those who are only focused on scoring goals for themselves. Let me tell you, the Minister of Justice scored a goal there. Because the Minister of Migration indeed could’ve known it was a criminal and he shouldn’t have sent him back. It was a clear mistake, and the Minster of Justice capitalised on that. Nevermind that it was an own-goal, against his own coalition. That’s just a detail. The important thing is that the Minister scored. What will happen now? There will be more fences between Justice and Migration, and more bureaucracy and sign-offs to ensure that the blame-game can continue. This will result in an even slower government, and nobody benefits.

What should a real leader do in this situation? Realise that it was a systemic failure that such a big criminal got away, and take ownership of the problem. That is the ONLY way to improve the situation and make sure this doesn’t happen again. He should sit together with the department of Migration and ask the 5 WHYs. Google that if you haven’t heard of it. He should propose different ways of working in HIS OWN department that decreases the likelihood of failures like this. He should propose new laws that will keep a criminal like that behind bars until trial. Why was he free in the first place?

This is also true in software development. Although, we don’t often let high-profile criminals escape, we do make plenty of errors. And you can always look outside for reasons:

The technology choice made earlier by the architects was not right

We didn’t get the data in the format we expected from the DBAs

Infra didn’t give us the access we needed

The project leader didn’t give us the time we need for the task at hand

The operations people didn’t deploy our code as we specified

With an attitude like that, you will never deliver projects successfully. Instead, you have to think about what you could’ve done differently:

I didn’t challenge the technology choice clear enough or I was afraid to ask for help when I didn’t really understand the technology.

I didn’t sit together often enough with the DBAs to make sure their data maps with what we need

I should’ve involved infra from the start of the project. I should’ve known they have a lot on their plate, and they can’t drop everything the moment I walk in.

I should’ve more clearly communicated the technical complexities and risks of the task at hand to the project leader

I should’ve introduced the concept of devops months ago in order to guarantee smooth deployments.

Just like in the politics example above, this is the ONLY way to improve a situation and make sure it doesn’t happen again. As a prime example of a good leader, watch this awe-inspiring example from Jocko Willink:

Don’t be like the current Belgian Government. Be like Jocko Willink. :-) And if something bad happens? Good! Because it’s an opportunity to learn.