How can one per­son con­quer so much ter­ri­to­ry in a life time to actu­al­ly change the face of the world? What char­ac­ter­is­tics and cir­cum­stances cre­at­ed this phe­nom­e­na?

As  con­sul­tants, we are brought into orga­ni­za­tions to help the CEO’s reshape the cul­ture, the orga­ni­za­tion and oth­er aspects. In read­ing Weatherford’s Ghengis Khan, I was con­stant­ly aston­ished  and amazed by some of his lead­er­ship char­ac­ter­is­tics. We are so quick to judge based on sto­ries passed down.

1. He orga­nized and pro­mot­ed based on abil­i­ty, not clan sta­tus or roy­al­ty;

2. Pre-planned all mil­i­tary cam­paigns leav­ing lit­tle to chance and learn­ing from each encounter (from the peo­ple whom he con­quered);

3. Fran­cis­can artists bor­rowed themes and tech­niques brought thru com­mence by the Mon­gols. At the monastery  at Assisi you can see sub­jects depict­ed in events from the life of Christ as Mon­gols with Mon­gol dress, and tex­tiles unknown at that time in Europe;

3. Incor­po­rat­ed (not as slaves) the con­quered civ­i­liza­tions into the Mon­gol Empire, tak­ing the best ideas and peo­ple to work in the new­er, larg­er Empire;

4. Set up a com­mu­ni­ca­tion sys­tem, a postal sys­tem and also got into print­ing;

5. Estab­lished a rank­ing sys­tem with­in the mil­i­tary that guar­an­teed loy­al­ty, fair share dis­tri­b­u­tion, again based on mer­it, and guar­an­teed care for mil­i­tary fam­i­lies whether wound­ed or dead;

6. Women also held posi­tions of promi­nence  through­out the Empire;

7. He allowed all reli­gions a place in the Empire;

This is not to say that he did not kill ene­mies and pil­lage oth­er groups. How­ev­er, he nev­er made  sport out of killing and tor­ture as was done in Europe.

How would you judge his lead­er­ship style? Weatherford’s book is cer­tain­ly well writ­ten and enlightening–a worth­while read.



Did you like this? Share it: