The Tao te Ching is an enormously popular text, and guide to leadership. What I'm interested in getting some opinions about is why it's principles are so effective? What underlies the Taoist philosophy that makes it actually work in practice?
People interested in leadership have probably heard or seen the phrase “leading from behind”. It’s the idea that leaders don’t guide a group of people, a team, a company, etc. from the front, in the traditional top-down management hierarchy. Instead, they lead from the rear, like a shepherd tending to a flock.
Taoism does not identify man's will as the root problem. Rather, it asserts that man must place his will in harmony with the natural universe.
Taoist philosophy recognizes that the Universe already works harmoniously according to its own ways; if a person exerts his will against or upon the world he would disrupt the harmony that already exists, he would go ‘against the flow of life’. (i.e. the harmonious change of seasons of summer, autumn, winter, spring - the tao- works well.
Well, first off I'd like to point out that sometimes it doesn't work at all. Leading from behind is great when everything is essentially routine, or where disruptions to routine have small overall impacts. It doesn't work when there are strong difference of opinion between parties that must work together to solve a problem, or where immediate and direct decision is required to set a direction. There's a reason that the military doesn't take this approach, after all. Leading from behind is highly effective when the group is moderately small. It's great for a team of say 20 to 30 individuals, who all have clearly defined roles and responsibilities. It's much less effective when the group is large or when roles are fluid or ill-defined.The hope is for responses from those already versed in the text, but I'll give it a go.
Singling out a single section is difficult, but I think you could compare the overarching premise of the Tao te Ching with the concept of leading from behind.
Leading from behind: How and why it works
Everything you need to know about leading teams from behind to encourage problem-solving and innovation.www.fingerprintforsuccess.com
People interested in leadership have probably heard or seen the phrase “leading from behind”. It’s the idea that leaders don’t guide a group of people, a team, a company, etc. from the front, in the traditional top-down management hierarchy. Instead, they lead from the rear, like a shepherd tending to a flock.
Basically, you do nothing until it's critical that someone or something gets re-directed, then you step in briefly and interject. My take is that this is what Taoism proposes
What I'm trying to find the words for is why does this work. What is it about people, and human organization, that makes this an effective approach?
Well, first off I'd like to point out that sometimes it doesn't work at all. Leading from behind is great when everything is essentially routine, or where disruptions to routine have small overall impacts. It doesn't work when there are strong difference of opinion between parties that must work together to solve a problem, or where immediate and direct decision is required to set a direction. There's a reason that the military doesn't take this approach, after all. Leading from behind is highly effective when the group is moderately small. It's great for a team of say 20 to 30 individuals, who all have clearly defined roles and responsibilities. It's much less effective when the group is large or when roles are fluid or ill-defined.The hope is for responses from those already versed in the text, but I'll give it a go.
Singling out a single section is difficult, but I think you could compare the overarching premise of the Tao te Ching with the concept of leading from behind.
Leading from behind: How and why it works
Everything you need to know about leading teams from behind to encourage problem-solving and innovation.www.fingerprintforsuccess.com
People interested in leadership have probably heard or seen the phrase “leading from behind”. It’s the idea that leaders don’t guide a group of people, a team, a company, etc. from the front, in the traditional top-down management hierarchy. Instead, they lead from the rear, like a shepherd tending to a flock.
Basically, you do nothing until it's critical that someone or something gets re-directed, then you step in briefly and interject. My take is that this is what Taoism proposes
What I'm trying to find the words for is why does this work. What is it about people, and human organization, that makes this an effective approach?
In some sense, I liken this leadership approach to communism (the philosophical kind, not the soviet union kind). It's conceptually great, but only on a small scale. It works very very well... in a small community. But it doesn't scale. Same thing with worker-owned businesses - they're awesome for small businesses, but they break down when you get above a certain number of people. If the people involved are very homogenous in thought and belief, it can work for a somewhat larger group, but at some point it just falls apart.
With respect to Taoism... to the extent that I accept any religion as reasonable, this is probably it. I'm not an expert, but I read it a long time ago, and much of the concepts resonated with me. To me, taoism seems like a common-sense approach to adaptability. Equilibrium, balance, non-contradiction, and fluidity were all concepts that I appreciate.
From the horses mouth:
Taoism does not identify man's will as the root problem. Rather, it asserts that man must place his will in harmony with the natural universe.Taoist philosophy recognizes that the Universe already works harmoniously according to its own ways; if a person exerts his will against or upon the world he would disrupt the harmony that already exists, he would go ‘against the flow of life’. (i.e. the harmonious change of seasons of summer, autumn, winter, spring - the tao- works well.
People need to understand the underlying rules of the world around them, and live in accord with those rules.
Taoism to me is like Libertarianism. It is a partial look at the universe. The good things about Taoism is how universal it is in application. The bad is how laissez faire it reads after a while. I really like the book in High School, because it helped provide a philosophical foundation to an atheist surround by Catholicism.
From the horses mouth:
Taoism does not identify man's will as the root problem. Rather, it asserts that man must place his will in harmony with the natural universe.Taoist philosophy recognizes that the Universe already works harmoniously according to its own ways; if a person exerts his will against or upon the world he would disrupt the harmony that already exists, he would go ‘against the flow of life’. (i.e. the harmonious change of seasons of summer, autumn, winter, spring - the tao- works well.
Taoism to me is like Libertarianism. It is a partial look at the universe. The good things about Taoism is how universal it is in application. The bad is how laissez faire it reads after a while. I really like the book in High School, because it helped provide a philosophical foundation to an atheist surround by Catholicism.
From the horses mouth:
Taoism does not identify man's will as the root problem. Rather, it asserts that man must place his will in harmony with the natural universe.Taoist philosophy recognizes that the Universe already works harmoniously according to its own ways; if a person exerts his will against or upon the world he would disrupt the harmony that already exists, he would go ‘against the flow of life’. (i.e. the harmonious change of seasons of summer, autumn, winter, spring - the tao- works well.
Personally, Taoism provides a few things in that it helps one reflect on what is and isn't important, an helps reflect how the environment applies itself to us. It also helps in the concept of action through inaction, but obviously steadfast inaction isn't a very good permanent strategy.
But as I read it more a decade plus later, it felt overly simplistic. Like Libertarianism, which works as a filter on a tool, but not as a tool itself. Taoism isn't wisdom, wisdom knowing when to apply Taoism.