Stop your leadership and start leading

A recent post on a social networking site asked for examples of leading edge leadership programmes. It got me thinking!

Can the way in which leadership is addressed actually make a difference. In general most organisations have an established programme of development through which everyone is processed. Having completed the programme they are then able to "tick the box". Hey presto leaders have been created; but have they?

If leadership is about attainment, are these people any better able to recognise and respond? If they are, is that as a direct result of the leadership programmes they attended?

Where are today's leaders? I'm not just talking about the people who wear the badge of office or those that have attended the organisations leadership programme. When you look back at these programmes now in the light of some of the most difficult of times can these leaders recognise and respond then lead the way?

I hope so, but as I look at the public news streams forgive me for not holding my breath. There is an absence of response when the light of expectation is shone into the organisations both private and especially public where the greatest response is required. Occasionally, an individual will emerge, most recently a General, hardly ever a politician or more worryingly a senior public sector figure.

Lists of great leaders all show one thing in common. Great leaders all get something done. This something is a recogniseable attainment. It is also not uncommon for those great leaders to have faced substantial risks.

Excuse me for asking; where are our leaders? Are they worrying too much about leadership as they re-read their manuals and not enough about leading in these difficlut times.

Global warming, is it only linked to human CO2 production?

I've watched and read a little on this topic over the last few months, trying to find an unbiased and comprehensive review of the information and evidence. Is it me or is that difficult to find?

I'm left with a few questions:

When direct temperature data is not available, they use proxy data. Commonly tree ring data is quoted. In a hot year trees grow more thus capturing more carbon? So what is the estimated carbon capture increase from this and other vegetation growth?

What is the estimated burden of the combined effect of the forest fires e.g. California and Australia and volcanic activity?

Why do we as a race still support deforestation in key parts of the world?

Does carbon offsetting actually work?

I have several other questions, perhaps you would add yours or indeed any answers you may have.