The heroic model of leader-ship, in which great accomplishmentsin the corporate world are attributedto single individuals, is alive and wellin the popular business press despitethe fact that for the past ten years thismodel has been disparaged by man-agement academics and consultantsalike. These academics and consul-tants now advocate a more situa-tional, distributed view, in whichleadership is no longer seen as a bun-dle of traits possessed by a singleleader but as a complex processoccurring among leaders and follow-ers at many levels of an organizationand in a variety of contexts.

In the public arena, however, thepopular vision of the heroic leaderremains undimmed. A testament tothe power of this vision is theextended celebration that took placein Britain in 2005 commemoratingthe life and heroic death of viceadmiral Lord Horatio Nelson. Theoccasion for this outpouring ofnational pride was the bicentennial ofthe Battle of Trafalgar. On October21, 1805, Nelson inflicted a devastat-ing defeat on the combined Frenchand Spanish fleets, only to die him-

self at the moment of victory, cutdown by a sniper’s musket ball.

It is difficult for those who don’tlive in England to appreciate theadulation accorded to Nelson and theenthusiasm shown in the hundreds ofcelebrations that took place aroundthe country. The historical eventssurrounding Nelson are far beyondliving memory. Yet in England, whenpeople are asked to think of greatcountrymen, the name of HoratioNelson is second only to that ofWinston Churchill. Part of the rea-son for this is the highly emotionalcontext of those distant times, forthe decades after the AmericanRevolutionary War were a dark timefor England: the American colonieshad been lost and the chaos of theFrench Revolution in 1789 had beenfollowed by the rise of NapoleonBonaparte, who by 1805 had madehimself master of Europe. Thereonly England, protected by the seaand the Royal Navy, stood againstNapoleon.

TIME FOR REFLECTIONFor students of management thebicentennial of the Battle of Trafalgarand the death of Nelson was anopportunity to reflect on the ways inwhich leadership skills are developedin institutional contexts. In the lateeighteenth and early nineteenth cen-turies, the Royal Navy was by far the

largest and most efficient organizationin Britain. Commercial organizationswere in their infancy, so the navy wasa magnet for able young men who,with neither wealth nor family con-nections, needed to earn a living.

Much has been made of Nelson’spersonal qualities, and there is nodoubt that he was an exceptionallytalented and daring individual whohad a rare touch with people. But itwas the capacity of the navy’s offi-cers and sailors to execute and coor-dinate complex moves under anextraordinary variety of conditionsthat gave Nelson free rein in exercis-ing his brilliance. Using exemplaryseamanship, he was able to concen-trate his strengths against enemyweaknesses and deliver devastatingattacks. Once his ships were in theright positions and at point-blankrange, he and his fellow officers knewthat the British gunners could fire abroadside every two minutes—a ratemany times faster than that of theFrench and Spanish ships opposingthem. The confidence this generatedamong the Royal Navy’s command-ers—and their consequent habit ofengaging the enemy closely andaggressively—gave the British sailorsa reputation for ferocity. The victoryat Trafalgar guaranteed British navalsupremacy for more than a hundredyears after.

What kind of training allowed theRoyal Navy to produce a stream of

L I A • VO LU M E 26 , N U M B E R 6 • JA N UA RY/ F E B R UA RY 20 07

20

Issues & Observat ions

The Full Nelson:Leadership Lessons

from a British Naval HeroDavid Hurst

Editor’s note: Issues & Observations isa venue for CCL staff members andassociates to express their personalviews about leadership.

talented officers and capable seamenover such an extended period oftime? In today’s business world weknow that the best leadership devel-opment programs for people workingin large organizations deliver particu-lar kinds of experiences, namely,challenging assignments, bosses whohave a significant impact on theirsubordinates, and hardships. Thesethree factors were the hallmarks ofthe Royal Navy of Nelson’s era, andhis brother officers experienced themthroughout their careers.

Nelson himself went to sea at theage of twelve and spent thirty of hisforty-seven years afloat. He served onat least twenty-five ships and com-manded vessels of progressivelylarger sizes. His challenges coveredall the perils of sailing and fighting inwartime conditions as well as a vari-ety of land-based tests—everythingfrom assaults by way of rivers tosieges of towns and forts.

He was given many of theseassignments while he was young—his first command, of the schoonerLittle Lucy, occurred when he wasnineteen—and these early experi-ences gave him both an outsider’sand a seaman’s perspective on thenavy. He refused to ask his men to doanything he would not do himself,and this led to the widespread per-ception that Nelson was always onthe side of fairness for commonsailors and officers alike. There is nodoubt that as with many of today’ssuccessful managers, this approachwas aided greatly by the variety ofbosses and role models Nelson had ashe made his way up the ladder ofpromotion. His uncle, CaptainMaurice Suckling, was his originalrole model, mentor, and sponsor, andlater, as comptroller of the navy,Suckling became Nelson’s patron.Nelson had a knack for forming closeties with senior officers under whomhe served, and many of themremained friends and mentorsthroughout his life.

Nelson discovered early in hiscareer that it was better to persuadethan to command. In the Royal Navythere was a natural discipline of theservice, what the early-twentieth-century management writer MaryParker Follett called the law of thesituation. On a ship everyone isaware of the situation and alive to theinherent dangers. Most orders areseen not as arbitrary dictates fromabove but as intelligent responses tothe situation designed to promote the

welfare of the organization as awhole. Thus, at sea, technical expert-ise and committed teamwork havesurvival value, and would-be auto-crats ignore them at their peril.

The isolated existence of a ship atsea magnifies both the strengths andweaknesses of a ship’s captain, andNelson’s commanding officers (his“bosses”) ran the gamut of leadershipstyles. He spent two years on thefrigate Seahorse with the fiercedisciplinarian George Farmer, whohad a reputation for having two menflogged every week. Nelson thenserved under the kindly James Pigot on the Dolphin. Later, battle-hardened veteran William Locker,captain of the Lowestoft, became oneof Nelson’s mentors and a closefriend. Well-read and gregarious,Locker was an important catalyst forthe development of Nelson’s habitsand character. As Nelson rose in sen-iority, he made a habit of taking on asimilar mentorship role with his sub-

ordinates, introducing them to peoplein society who could help them intheir careers. In an era when patron-age was essential to career develop-ment, officers such as Nelson weremuch sought after by subordinatesfor the development opportunitiesthey offered, not to mention thechance of glory from successfulactions and personal wealth fromcaptured ships, or prizes.

HONING TEAMWORKNaval life during this era is oftendescribed as one long hardship. Apartfrom the extended periods away fromland and family, the close quarters,and the heavy manual labor, therewere the ever-present hazards of dis-ease and accident (which togetheraccounted for 85 percent of the RoyalNavy’s fatalities), not to mentionshipwreck and enemy action. Nelsonand other British officers sailed theirships in every conceivable circum-stance, from the hurricanes andshoals of the West Indies to thestorms and sandbanks of the NorthSea. British warships were more thantwice as likely to be lost throughwrecking or foundering as they werethrough enemy action. But it was thisintensive seafaring practice thatdeveloped and honed the teamworkessential for excellence in sailing andgunnery. In contrast the French andSpanish fleets, penned up in theirports by a British blockade, had farless opportunity to develop theseskills. As a result the morale of theirofficers and sailors was low, andFrench admiral Pierre Villeneuveknew he was beaten even before heset out to sea from Cadiz, Spain, onOctober 20, 1805.

The slowness of communicationsresulted in a high degree of decentral-ization in the management of theRoyal Navy and encouraged individ-ual initiative on the part of its com-manders. This decentralization oftenallowed subordinates to realize their

L I A • VO LU M E 26 , N U M B E R 6 • JA N UA RY/ F E B R UA RY 20 07

21

Nelson discovered early

in his career that it was

better to persuade than

to command.

commanders’ intentions without nec-essarily obeying specific instructions.Nelson made his intentions clear tothe captains under his command bysocializing regularly with them.Every evening, when the weather wascalm, his commanders would rowacross to Nelson’s ship and discussnaval strategy and tactics over dinner.When the time came for action,everyone knew how to respond toopportunities as they appeared andwhat to expect from his colleagues.

Like many heroes, Nelson had hisflaws; his virtues were mixed withfaults. He could be vain and arrogant,and his affair with Lady EmmaHamilton scandalized polite society.Not all his battles were victories; sev-eral of his failures occurred when hewas out of his element, in land-basedattacks. In these ventures he lost hisright arm and his vision in one eye.

Despite Nelson’s flaws, when itcame to duty and service, his focuswas totally on professionalism andexecution built through long years ofchallenging assignments, bosses whohad a significant influence on him,and hardships.

NEW CHALLENGESIn the Royal Navy of Nelson’s era thecontexts and experiences that developleadership talent were supplied with-out conscious design. In large mod-ern organizations, however, whereyoung managers are often insulatedfrom the elements, such experiencescannot be left to chance.

Organizations should create careerpaths that expose young managers tonew challenges every two to fouryears and that prepare them to benefitfrom these assignments. To becomeskilled in execution, managers shouldreceive timely, specific feedback ontheir actions, preferably from theirpeers and mentors. (Feedback delayedis feedback denied.) Effective mentorsshould be identified, and young man-agers should be allocated to them forregular discussions.

It generally takes ten years todevelop an expert in any complexskill, whether it’s golf, chess, or man-aging a business. Developing expertmanagers takes a lot of hard work,often in the face of resistance tochange from inside the organization.

One of the most importantinsights to be gained from Nelson’sstory is that there are three mainsources of discipline in an organiza-tion: discipline imposed from above,discipline at the bottom of the organ-ization (self-discipline), and whatNelson would have called the disci-pline of the sea—discipline imposed

by the shared understanding of theorganization’s situation and possiblefutures.

Discipline imposed from the top isthe least effective of the three, but itoften seems to be the default choiceof many managers. No doubt thisreflects what a major challenge it isfor managers to create a discipline ofthe sea without the physical contextsof ships and oceans. Managers whohave participated in outdoor leader-ship courses are familiar with thisproblem: in the outdoor context par-ticipants change their behaviors adap-tively, but no sooner are they back inthe workplace than all their old habitsreturn.

One of Nelson’s techniques that isavailable to all managers is the use ofthe shared meal as a leadership devel-opment tool. Effective managers

L I A • VO LU M E 26 , N U M B E R 6 • JA N UA RY/ F E B R UA RY 20 07

know that one of the best ways tobuild a capable team is to share ameal together on a regular basis.

In some societies this practice isinstitutionalized. In Japan, forinstance, it is impractical for man-agers to have open discussions withtheir subordinates during the day—the formality of their relationshipsand the pace of work make it impos-sible. But in the evenings at thekaraoke bar, when the beer is flow-ing, almost any topic can bebroached without fear of retribution.In saunas in Finland, managersdressed in towels rather than suitscan raise the most sensitive ofissues.

The social networks, honest dia-logue, and camaraderie that emergefrom such interactions are invaluableand are difficult to duplicate in anyother way. The major benefit of manyleadership development programsmay be that they offer plenty ofopportunities to eat together. Indeed,the three best sessions in many suchdevelopment programs are oftenbreakfast, lunch, and dinner—pro-vided of course that the example ofthe Royal Navy is not followed tooliterally and the participants go easyon the salt pork and the biscuits withweevils.

David K. Hurst (david@davidkhurst.com) is a managementconsultant whose writings haveappeared in business publications suchas the Financial Times, HarvardBusiness Review, andStrategy+Business, of which he is acontributing editor. Hurst is the authorof Crisis & Renewal: Meeting theChallenge of Organizational Change(Harvard Business School Press, 1995)and Learning from the Links:Mastering Management Using Lessonsfrom Golf (Free Press, 2002). He is aresearch fellow at the Richard IveySchool of Business, University ofWestern Ontario, in London, Ontario,and was a visiting scholar at CCL in1998 and 1999.

22

Organizations should

create career paths

that expose young man-

agers to new challenges

every two to four years.