My book club, The Reading Society, finally came to The Prince in our read through of the Great Books. It had been one I was looking forward to in order to see what all the fuss was about. Why do we label tactical politicians as Machiavellian? Why did the adjective always seem to have a negative undertone, perhaps even amoral, if not evil. I read the book and I found, actually, it is the first leadership book. A helpful proto-business book.
Machiavelli wrote his small book as a gift to help a leader in the era of Italian City States. His ends were practical: how do you hold on to power and leadership in the midst of other city states that want to take over. And his means were practical as well: know the character of the people you govern, weigh the risks of bringing in outsiders to help you win a battle, always be self improving so that you are ready for the inevitable next battle.
The practicality made this book immediately applicable. The lessons are many and fit not just in a city state governance but in the cubicle, the production team, the ministry at church, the board of the PTA. He first recommends that we understand the people we attempt to lead. If we don’t understand what they are used to and what they value we will likely fail by leading them in a way that fits some other people.
A democratic people loves freedom while those under a monarchy will be used to order and stability. If my team is used to working as a brain trust and working together to come up with a solution, taking that away will bring only friction. But if the team expects direction then calling a brainstorming session may be paralyzing.
The Prince encouraged observation and weighing of options. The caution to not listen to counselors who always give advice without being asked was counterintuitive but helpful. The interests of that counselor may be something other than the good of the state (or project or business). A good leader is one who evaluates counsel when it is asked for and proceeds after weighing it.
The evaluation of types of minds was blunt and to the point. “…there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehended; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.” And also caused me to chuckle.
And even the often cited example of whether it is better to be loved or feared was revealed to always be cited in an incomplete way. The chapter in full points out that you should only work to control what you can control. Because you can’t cause someone to love you, that should not be the thing you worry about. Because you can execute laws (directives, goals, accountability structures, KPIs), and make clear to people they are to follow them because that is what they ought to do, fear (or an understanding that people will be punished for breaking the law) is something you can control and thus something you should emphasis. From that perspective of course that is true. I shouldn’t try to gift limited treasure to make a people love me when that will only run out and that was not the cause of their love anyway. Control what you can control.
The strength of the book was its practicality but it was pursued to a fault. The book lacked an emphasis on the why of pursuit of power. It seemed to mock the philosophers who pondered an ideal kingdom founded on justice and virtue (Socrates). But even in its deficiency, “it is unnecessary for a prince to have all the good qualities I have described, but it is very necessary to appear to have them”, it inadvertently admits that there are good qualities that are desirable, good, and beneficial to be observed.
While I expected a negative and conniving book, I found a very practical helpful read on leadership. This should remind us: always read the book instead of taking people’s commentary about the book as gospel. There is a reason Machiavelli’s name is in our lexicon. That alone is reason to read it.
This was the first leadership book and we should be reading it before we read the latest best seller. Many of them are just copying the original.