Leadership success and failure in Apple, Patriots, Enron, and Blockbuster

1 Great Leadership Two successful organizations that experienced a change were Apple and the New England Patriots. Two failed organizations that experienced a change were Enron and Blockbuster. This paper will discuss why Apple and the Patriots have been successful and why Enron and Blockbuster were not successful. Apple succeeded in the 21st century after falling out of favor with much of the tech world in the decade prior because it responded to the demands of the new Digital Age with innovative technology that captured the imaginations of the consuming public. Apple’s vision transformed the way we think of phones, the way we think of music, and the way we think of preserving and sharing information. The Patriots succeeded when Drew Bledsoe was lost to injury because they filled the gap at quarterback with a leader whose motto was simple but effective: “Do your job,” and, “Trust the process.” Brady’s leadership and Apple’s vision under Jobs were what propelled their organizations to success. Both successful organizations had visions to help the leaders propel their organizations to the next level, but both also had extremely competent leaders who had the skill to lead by example, by communication of the vision, and by the ability to motivate and encourage. Enron failed when it changed from an energy company into a financial company because its leaders were unethical. Ken Lay, Jeff Skilling and Andy Fastow all suffered from a lack of ethical decision making and as a result, their company’s books became fraudulent and investigators soon found out, causing the company to collapse from a great height. Blockbuster failed when the Internet arrived en force because it did not have the vision in place to take steps to be competitive with game changers like Netflix, which provided streaming and DVD delivery via mail. Blockbuster’s leaders were essentially sleeping on the job when Netflix saw an opportunity to upend the entire video rental industry using the Internet as the big game changing means to do it. The leadership at Enron and Blockbustser should have been more focused on integrity, in the case of Enron, and the future, in the case of Blockbuster. Where Apple was innovative and forward-looking, Blockbuster was complacent and blind to the changing dynamic of video in the Digital Age. Where the Patriots under Brady were disciplined and whole, Enron’s leadership was loose and fragmented, with few actually knowing what the Fastow, the CFO, was up to. I would categorize the leadership at Apple and New England as transformative because the leaders in both organizations embraced change, had a vision that was compelling, disciplined, achievable and innovative; and the leaders supported the process of transformation. I would categorize the leadership at Enron and Blockbuster as self-serving in terms of padding their own pockets while deceiving investors, and unprepared for what was coming in terms of the new era of e-commerce. The style of leadership that would have been most effective for the failed organizations would have been transformational leadership and ethical leadership. The styles that would have been least effective during these changes would have been democratic leadership (which, in a way, is what got Enron in trouble because too many individuals were given opportunities to share and even usurp the leadership position from the actual CEO) and servant leadership, which would not have solved the problem of lacking in innovation and vision at Blockbuster.