Summary so far

Many leaders are driven people, forced by childhood experiences to have to achieve greater and still greater levels of "success". They cannot brook challenge or questioning, in some cases they have to be liked. Those who try to challenge are exited quickly. Gradually the driven leader is surrounded by yes-men and yes-women who pander to his ego through fear, the need for self-preservation or the need for the overarching security of the superman, the white knight. These forces are profound drivers for them too.

Here lies a critical need for the non-executive director and the focus of corporate governance. So far, so much of the spotlight has been shone on such relatively accessible aspects such as shareholder interests. These pale by comparison with the dangers of successful men and women who start to believe their own rhetoric, to think themselves capable beyond their ability and to start to believe they are owed huge rewards and commensurate acclaim. Their judgement goes, they chase the next acquisition for its own sake, their team loses its ability to challenge and question. Just look at the records of AT&T, Enron, and I suggest also Shell and to come…….?

We have focussed so far on bonding as the driver most abused. "Defending" is nearby – the leaders do not want to have their turf challenged. That is why they are likely to centralise decision-making. They will issue edicts for growth, demand results, and allocate blame from a remote headquarters, with little or no attention to the special characteristics of the local community. It is why, as a generalisation, the more governments centralise decision-making, the more we should, in principle, want to challenge them.

But "bonding" and "defending" are not the only drivers that can and do lead to a traumatic response. "Learning" is a sensitive area too. The other, most common, reflective memory is that of the schoolroom. Time and again children "survive" their parents only to be confronted by the gauntlet of insensitive school teachers. First a moment of respect for almost all school teachers.. For most of us, some of our most cherished memories are of the support, encouragement and inspiration given to us (“given” – they are scarcely paid a subsistence wage for their efforts!) by those school teachers, who picked us out of self-doubt and depression. I can remember with unconditional affection Peter Gale and Edwin Calvert at my school, who showed a trust in me and support for me that changed my life. A recent TV advert for teachers had famous people in the UK recalling their own inspirational teacher.

What the adverts did not show was the lifelong traumas created by those teachers who gave, instead, a murderous undercutting of their young childrens characters.

"I hated and feared classroom plays – I would always get the worst parts, the non-speaking ones – because I was "too stupid to do anything else."

"Why didnt I go to University? Why didnt I! Ill tell you – because my housemaster said I was too thick to have a chance. It blighted the rest of my life."

"I loved English literature, I loved music, loved sport. I was too short-sighted for sport so OK. I cried when I heard Tristan – so they said I was wet. It took me 20 years to know better."

"Can you believe it – expelled for walking home the kid sister of my best friend! What did we have to do, dress up like Jesuits! But that put paid to University."

Each one of these quotes, and many more like them, come from CEOs . Teaching young people may require all the hours, tests and paperwork that civil servants normally ascribe to it in their bureaucratic "cohort requirements" and box-filling. But in addition it requires something else that is so much more important and so threatening to the dissembling classes of pen-pushers intent only on their own job protection in Whitehall. Real teachers have courage and character and the ability to share their inspiration. They are miles way from the inadequacies of box-ticking. They know instinctively that the most valuable contribution they can make is to light the touch paper of enthusiasm in their children. They have the courage, when called upon, to lay down the law, but they also have the understanding and genuine vocation to want to help. Alas some schools are not the source of inspiration so much as abuse.

For many the abuse took the form of bullying. Bullying amongst boys is one of those shaming areas that tragically so many young people cover up. Afraid of their vulnerability, they refuse to allow themselves to admit and therefore deal with it. What behaviour pattern does this create?

Karen Robsons work for the Institute for Social " Economic Research at Essex University suggests that children who were bullied at school seek refuge later in organisations that are keen to welcome newcomers, such as political parties and charities. Playground sufferers, she has found, are 60% more likely to be "civically engaged" by 29 than more popular children. Britains junior education minister, himself bullied at school, has spoken of "the sense of isolation and loneliness, the suppressed anger and the feeling in the pit of my stomach every morning as I set off for school.". Neil Kinnock, the former leader of the Labour party and Vice President of the European Commission, was, in common with many red-headed children, beaten up regularly by older boys. Here is the dark side of bonding at its most raw – unthinking children covering up their own feelings of inadequacy by taunting a younger, weaker boy because he is different – red-headed, small, fat, short-sighted, whatever. Neil Kinnock said "It was not just physically painful – it was humiliating. I remember that hideous, dry, terrified feeling – a complete lack of confidence, complete humiliation inside myself. If you were in your early teens, tubby and ginger, you were a target". For some men, school was indeed a place where lasting psychological wounds were inflicted. And for women too.

Comment on this page