From Rio to Hinkley via Heathrow
Is it right to ban all Russian Olympians from Rio 2016, or only those known to be dopers? Should the UK build or not build a third runway at Heathrow, or a new nuclear plant at Hinkley Point?
The International Olympic Committee sidestepped a decision to impose a blanket-ban on all Russian competitors in the wake of the doping scandal. Instead it left it up to the 28 sports federations. At the eleventh hour, the UK Government surprised everyone by announcing a delay on a decision to build a new nuclear plant at Hinkley Point (imagine the surprise at EDF Energy in France – whose Board five minutes earlier had decided to back the project.) Meanwhile, plans to build an extra runway at Heathrow or Gatwick had already been postponed again until the autumn.
One thing that differentiates leaders from followers – their capacity of decision making. Yet it was followers not leaders who decided the UK’s Brexit fate in June. Are we facing a crisis of responsibility? Did the IOC duck responsibility for showing a zero tolerance on doping? Or was its delegation of decision making motivated by fairness/‘clean’ competitors in sports/good anti-doping credentials? Are the delays with Heathrow and Hinkley a failure of leadership or a sensible concern to ‘get it right?’
If you struggle to decide which options to select from the restaurant menu, imagine how politicians and business leaders must feel about the choices laid before them? Still, it comes with the territory – if you don’t want the responsibility, don’t take on the role.
Two Q. Guides can help. Try our booklet on Decision Making for some practical approaches to improving how you can improve your judgement, and for a more comprehensive treatment, see our latest Q. Guide – Transformational Leadership Here…
Just for the record (not that I get to decide these things) my decisions would be: Yes to Heathrow. No to Hinkley Point. And a blanket ban on Russian competitors.
Written by Richard Carr
