Originally Posted by
MickG0105
I understand the point that you were trying to make but I thought that it was poorly illustrated by the Lee-Grant comparison. I do not think that Gettysburg can be seen to define Lee's generalship any more than Kursk or El Alamein define the reputations of von Manstein and Rommel respectively. As to whether Lee was a traitor, well, the decision as to who is traitorous to whom (or what) in a civil war is generally determined by who won; was Cromwell a traitor?
My point was that most military historians rank Lee as a superior general, and most assuredly a superior leader, to Grant. You certainly can't say that Lee was any less a substantial military figure than Grant and he was most assuredly no less substantial for his professional deportment.
As to the argument of substance over image, you get no argument from me on that front. Having worked with both AJ and JB at different times in my career I frankly don't view one as any more or less "flashy" than the other. However, I think that to understand the differing fortunes of QF and VA you need to also look above and below the CEOs; at their boards and their C-level teams.
Knowing a few of the players at both QF and VA, my observation would be that VA, despite an influx of some quality QF people when JB joined as CEO in 2010, now lacks quality and depth at the general manager/manager level whereas QF fares much better in that regard. When AJ outlines a new strategy he knows that there's a good to very good chance that his team will achieve around 80% or better of what he wants them to achieve; when JB outlines a new strategy it's probably only a 50-50 bet.
Now, it may be coincidental, maybe not, that Leigh Clifford is Chairman at QF. Prior to that Leigh's entire 37 year career was spent in one business; Rio Tinto (formerly CRA). I cannot comment from personal experience on too many businesses but, having spent a fair chunk of my civilian career at Rio, I can say that it is one of the very few businesses I have seen that has, by design and considered effort, outstanding talent at the general manager/manager level. I have no doubt that Leigh brought that approach/thinking with him to QF. Again, it may be coincidental, maybe not, that Leigh became Chairman of Qantas in 2007 and Alan Joyce became CEO in 2008; that's a decade of stability.
We could go on for hours about Lee/Grant... or I could, that whole period fascinates me having been interested in it for many years and visited many of the actual locations where it was fought. I don't entirely agree with you but you do mount a good argument. I'm just not a big fan of Lee as a person.
I always think of the late Shelby Foote's comment of Grant having "four o'clock in the morning courage" or more specifically the ability to be awoken, told of the situation and be able to determine a strategy and response that was generally effective instantly.
Hehe... was Cromwell a Traitor... another favorite of mine. No, the King was!!! LOL
Similarly, moving on to the other part of your response, no argument here either. I think it would be fair to say that the influx of quality QF people to VA that ended up leaving was because JB is not an effective leader of any sort and didn't know what to do with them. Having some knowledge of both sides of the fence myself going back quite a few years up until recently, their are far too many quality people who have left VA for it to be an accident. From my limited exposure I am persuaded that Joyce is actually someone that I can have a conversation with on a normal level, whereas I feel there is a pretense to the other guy that frankly gives the impression he is 'better' than others or at least, on a higher plane - so to speak - I would say that is evidenced by his attitude to staff traveling in higher classes while making an exception for himself. I can't accord good leadership to a person who does that and seriously, by implication, puts forward the scenario that it's important for him to travel there by dint of status or whatever but not justifiable for a Captain or FO who are paxing for instance and will have 200-300 punters behind them flying back in the opposite direction. I find that illogical and an insult to ones intelligence and a good indicator of how his primitive thought process works. I could detail other examples where any operational person would shake their head at decisions that were made.
I'm also aware of how he conducts himself generally compared to his QF counterpart. It appears as though a number of his responses to, particularly operational situations, lack any substance or realworld experience - likely due to his background in sales - i.e. well developed sense of heightening the desire for a particular thing or product but zero ability to recognise an operational problem or the correct solution both at the micro and macro level.
I would suggest that Joyce's relative success is a combination of his background in several components of the airline business and a more analytical mind combined with the presence of Clifford which I think you correctly state as a factor. In addition I'd just say that having had exposure to both organisations, I think there was a far stronger operational culture and corporate memory at QF in that area and generally a better base of GM level experience developed over a longer period.
Joyce's strategy seems to have been to leave that largely alone whereas JB seems to have taken over an organisation without that depth and lacked any ability to build it. His efforts to date seem to have consisted of little more than hype and clutching at straws. Almost any other CEO I have had contact with over the years I believe could have made a better fist of it than he has. I don't think the Board he has is any large factor or at least not more so than his apparent incompetence if the, particularly, latest string of c-ckups is anything to go by.
Fascinating discussion though and you are obviously well versed in each of the topics we've discussed and able to articulate them well of which I can only say thank you!!!