Bloomberg, Abbas Mesaba Maximilien Robespierre, Charlie Pellett discussed on Bloomberg Best
Let's check the markets and some of today's top business stories. I'm Charlie Pellett. Stocks rallied for a second day to close out one of the worst months of the bull market on an upbeat note now for the month of October, the S and P five hundred index was down seven percent. Tony Dwyer is equity strategist at Canaccord Genuity. There are fundamental excuses. You could use for sure, but this correction really started out as excessive optimism historic Aaron extreme overbought in historically, low volatility, those three things kind of ushered in period that was right for the in correction and now now it's kind of opposite. You have an extreme oversold Wall Street. Meanwhile is looking ahead to Friday's jobs report has businesses stepped-up hiring with more. Here's Bloomberg's Vinny Del Giudice is the ADP employment report shows private payrolls expanded by two hundred twenty seven thousand in October. That's the biggest gain since February and top Wall Street. Forecasts the ADP data suggest a man for workers was fairly broad based across industries. The government will issue which monthly employment report Friday, Jude is Bloomberg radio. Facebook shares gained after earnings Paul Meeks is chief investment officer at slowly Dahl and Holst forget that when this company went public back in two thousand twelve that it almost immediately had to transition business from desktop to mobile. And so the company has been through a wrenching change before it has succeeded. And now they're going to go through another change, which is going to be all about video and Facebook shares rallied today by three point eight percent also moving higher after earnings General Motors up by nine point one percent as P five hundred index up Twenty-nine points ending October at twenty seven eleven advancing today by one point one percent. The Dow up two hundred forty one are by one percent. Nasdaq up one hundred forty four up by two percent. I'm Charlie Pellett. That's a Bloomberg business flash. Bloomberg best with June Grasso. And Ed Baxter continues. What do Walt Disney and Coco Chanel have in common. How about boss tweed and Margaret Thatcher? Well, they're all leaders, and they're all disgust in general Stanley mcchrystal's new book leaders myth and reality. He spoke with Bloomberg's Amy Morris and Peter Barnes, one of the points that you make in your book is that there's no magic. Bullet. There's no special formula for leadership explained that routes. Exactly, right. There's no set of traits or even behaviors that a leader can adopt and follow and be successful. Things are much more dependent upon the context of the situation. And what we really addressed in the book is the fact that leadership isn't what we think it is. And it never has been and the implications for that we have this two dimensional view of what leadership is and leaders. So we select elect promote and follow people in many cases, following some myths rather than reality in one of the points. You make in this book is that it's not just from the top down. You are not a boss. You are a leader. So it's a give and take did you ever find yourself in a position where you had to take a little bit as a leader some feedback from whoever was following you. Well, that's exactly right. You start your career typically trying to be technically and tactically competent in your job. And you want to direct your. Or leadership the skill. You have on people and over time, you find out that leadership is really an emergent property from the interaction between leaders, and followers, and then contextual factors in the situation. It should cause a thoughtful leader to be more humble about their role because they're not the dominant player, and yet historically we've looked at leaders in history through biography, and in a biography, you put the spotlight on that person and follow them to their life. And everything else is sorta out of the spotlight and in the shadows. And we discount just how important that is. So really leadership is almost like a chemical reaction that occurs between followers and the leader, sir. You're right about some bad guys as leaders Robespierre, the French revolution. Abu Musab bowser Cowley, the Al Qaeda leader that you fought in Iraq. Why give them any pages in your book because we follow them both Abbas Mesaba Maximilien Robespierre what we call zealots and in the case of Zelic. Well, we have a someone who burns white-hot with a confident conviction of their cause. And they tend to be unwavering they are just laser focused on something, and that becomes very magnetic to us because we think, wow, if they believe so strongly, and they're so willing to do things for their cause they must be right in the case of Robespierre. His goal was a virtuous French society. And yet he became to the point where he believed that terror was a necessary road to that in a five week period. They get TNT nine hundred people all in the name of virtue. And of course, they guillotine Robespierre because a zealot burn so white hot. They can burn. In the oxygen out of a system and people either tire of them or they're unwilling and unable to keep up that level of conviction. Abba, Moussa we was similar. He was poorly educated. But he became completely convicted about a fundamentalist form of Islam. I fought him for two and a half years. And I will tell you grudgingly. He was a good effective leader. Now when I say good, not good or bad in positive or negative. But he was an effective leader on the battlefield. And he got people to follow him who didn't have his same level of conviction for the cause. But because he was so magnetic about it, and so convinced to it, of course, the same way we killed him. But but he was almost sure to die simply because that kinda zealotry is hard to maintain in the ninety seconds or so we have left. This sounds like a lot of trust not just trusting your leader. But you have to be able to trust the people who are following you. How crucial is that in the leadership role? Yeah. The interaction the relationship is more than anything we typically account for and in reality. What that means is not only must you trust your leader. And the latest trust the following mistrust ourselves and our own values because we have agency in the process, we as followers, we have responsibility. We have to trust the direction that we want to take the leader as opposed to just standing sheepishly and following a leader and trust in them and just not less than ninety minute. Here. You talk about the myths of leadership. What is what is the one big meth? I think the biggest myth is results that we pick leaders who produce a good bottom line or win wars you win elections. And in reality when we went through the data, we follow leaders for very emotional reasons, and many of them are serial failures. And yet we follow him failure after failure. Because they reached some part of us that makes us. Feel good about it. Like a cult of personality. It's extraordinary. Yeah. It's it's illogical, but you look at leaders who constantly fail, and yet have people.