In his excellent blog, Stratechery, Ben Thompson described the initial hearings in Washington of Facebook and Twitter’s testimonies regarding alleged Russian interference in the US elections last November. In his first paragraph he picks on one particular moment of the proceedings “that suggested the entire endeavor would be a bit of a farce, marked by out-of-tech Senators oblivious to how the Internet actually works“.
Although Mr Thompson is describing a super-specific set of circumstances, I think there is far greater applicability of his words than merely to US Senators. Many of the leadership positions (Silicon Valley and start-ups excepted) in corporations, governments, and NGOs are held by people with the experience and track record that “proves” they are able to hold down a position of authority. One might call this their “legacy” except for that *legacy” these days is somewhat of a pejorative term, and used as much to describe out-of-date leaders as it is to describe clunky old IT systems. Mr Thompson’s declaration “(O)blivious to how the Internet actually works” is damning stuff indeed but is, unfortunately, probably true of many decision-makers.
This week’s demonstrably absent understanding in these US proceedings that the internet is globa,l and that this allows foreign players to transcend borders, is a good example of why lifelong learning is crucial, irrespective of where you may be in your career. Many “legacy” leaders have skills that are of limited use in addressing these new battles and new battle fronts. Whilst boards may agitate for greater and speedier moves towards “digital”, it’s a foolish leader who wades into battle unarmed.