Lyles: Why Poway Unified’s autocratic leadership fails

Many believe autocratic leaders can never achieve long term success. I remember Condoleezza Rice telling Anwar Sadat that his regime wouldn’t last because dictatorships can’t survive. Although Sadat may have been surprised at the Arab Spring uprising, Ms. Rice felt it was inevitable.

When it comes to organizations, however, autocrats do occasionally succeed. Walt Disney, Theodore Vail at AT&T, and Thomas Watson at IBM all built dynasties through largely autocratic — some would say dictatorial — styles of leadership. Although their companies’ excellence faded after their passing, these men clearly led their companies to greatness. Unfortunately, few corporate dictators achieve true pre-eminence. Most fail.

Several key differences distinguish between autocratic leaders who create vibrant, high-performing organizations and those who drive their organizations into the ground.

First is their commitment to an “other-serving” vision. For Disney it was making people happy. For Vail and Watson it was excellent service.

Second is integrity. This means treating everyone with honesty, openness and respect.

Third is problem solving. This means solving problems with solutions that serve both the vision of the organization and the legitimate needs of all stakeholders.

Finally is a relentless commitment to two-way communication to ensure that everyone understands what is happening and that unexpected obstacles to achieving the vision are anticipated when possible and responded to in a timely and effective manner. This allows problems to be solved at the lowest possible levels in the organization, before they reach crisis potential.

Autocratic leaders who succeed are often called “benevolent” dictators; not because they are pushovers or soft in enforcing corporate values, but because they take into account everyone’s needs while demanding high performance. They insist their mid-level leaders to likewise.

The emerging leadership problems in Poway Unified School District emanate from the autocratic style of Superintendent John Collins that contradicts these essential elements needed to achieve and sustain excellence.

First is the lack of an other-serving vision. “Putting Kids First” worked in the past because district leaders used it as a criteria for decision making. Now it is nothing more than a meaningless mantra. Don’t tell me what you believe; let me watch your decisions and behavior for a week and I’ll tell you what you believe. Too often today teachers and parents in the district are stymied by decisions that serve the hierarchy rather than the classroom.

Second is lack of leadership integrity. It seems impossible to get the truth about any issue from district administrators these days. It started with the billion dollar bond issue and has progressively worsened. Not only do administrators misrepresent policy changes (Thanksgiving is only one example), but they misrepresent conversations and meetings where they were out of line (the debacle with the county assessor, for example). The attitude appears to be, “because I am district staff whatever I say is true, and whatever I do is okay,” even when it is not.

Third is the habit of sweeping problems under the rug, denying the existence of certain problems, or saying the person who brought attention to the problem is the problem. Transparency worsens with each passing month.

Fourth is the lack of two way communication, both within the PUSD hierarchy and between PUSD and the public. During the bond uproar, I asked the board and Mr. Collins to listen to the concerns of the community, explaining that many people didn’t understand what was happening — with the bond and other issues. Mr. Collins repeatedly replied, “Tell them to come to the board meetings if they want to know what we’re doing.” That’s how dictatorial superintendents politely tell people to “kiss my ankle.”