For them that must obey authority
That they do not respect in any degree
Who despise their jobs, their destinies
Speak jealously of them that are free
Cultivate their flowers to be
Nothing more than something they invest in
Sometimes it’s okay to break the rules. Sometimes it’s absolutely the right thing to do. Do you ever break the rules on purpose?
In my upcoming book, Greater than Great, I address how great leaders adopt the attitudes and behaviors of the iconoclast. That means that they are willing to disrupt the status quo, buck convention, and bend and even break rules in order to do the right thing. My upcoming TEDx talk—Swizzle: The Way of the Change Agent—makes a similar argument.
Sometimes this approach is summarized as "Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things,” a statement attributed to Walter Bennis. While the iconoclastic leader is preeminently focused on doing the right thing, they also know that doing things the right way is often the best approach. In other words, iconoclasts follow the rules unless or until they determine that the rules are no longer productive or relevant.
Those who follow the rules at all costs, can never lead effectively. As I’ve suggested before, the same is true for teachers, so let me offer an example from my own career.
I occupied a unique niche among my fellow doctoral students at the University of Toronto. I was a “teaching assistant” or TA, which meant I reported to a university professor who oversaw me as I graded papers or taught classes.
That was not the unique part. What made me stand out was that I had already taught at the college level for several years while working on my masters degree. I actually had more teaching experience than some of the professors I worked for. Now that was different!
For a couple of years, I reported to a newly-minted English professor who oversaw a technical writing course for engineering students. In addition to me, he had about a dozen TAs from the graduate English Department to help him.
As the professor of record, he technically was leading a single course for hundreds of students. In reality, the TAs taught these students directly in much smaller independent classes. The professor and all the TAs, had little or no classroom teaching experience, so I was a veteran by comparison.
While the TAs taught the actual process of writing and guided the students through it in their smaller sections, the professor held weekly lectures with all the students in a large lecture theater. His weekly topic? Grammar.
Did a shudder go through your spine with that last statement? It should have. I don’t have the room here to fully convey how stupid his approach was, so let me offer an imperfect analogy.
Imagine that a group of teenagers is learning how to drive. Once a week, they must report to a PowerPoint presentation on the finer points of operating a vehicle—obscure traffic laws, aerial diagrams on parallel parking and k-turns, reviews of the various designs of dashboards, how combustion engines work, and the like. When it comes time to drive, what impact would these lectures have on the students’ driving? Any?
It’s the same with teaching grammar in this way. Knowing grammar can help with writing and even come in handy from time to time. But offering information about grammar outside the context of using it is at best a distraction.
Worse still, there was an emphasis of quantity over quality. We had to follow a mediocre textbook on writing and had to meet arbitrary metrics to demonstrate “progress.” It was a lot like working for a garden-variety shitty boss. Well, not “like.” It just was.
Imagine how I, someone who had taught writing for years, felt about all this. Not that I would describe myself as an expert teacher, but I knew wrong when I saw it. For instance, we held exams where students were required to do things that we never addressed or practiced in our smaller sections. This is like having to learn to play ping pong to join the tennis team.
I tried to gently redirect the professor’s efforts. No good. Then I tried arguing and pleading. He grew resentful of this “challenge” to his authority. Like many bad teachers, he was addicted to facile, performative nonsense that threatened to undermine everything the students had actually learned while testing little they did.
I’ve seen a lot of this BS in college education—the triumph of rigmarole over rigor. It’s education by delusion. Just doing something for the sake of doing something—the harder, the better.
For the major assignment of the semester, the students had to create an engineering report on a topic of their choosing. I recognized the strength of the project as testing their ability to construct a technical report while expressing themselves with clarity.
The professor of record offered no direction on the content of the report, so I let my students use content from assignments in their engineering classes. After all, the grade would be based on the quality of their writing and formatting, not the content of the report, which I wasn’t qualified to assess anyway. I didn’t ask permission for my choice.
The professor of record was furious with me although he could never articulate why. My students learned to structure and write a technical report, which was the entire goal of the assignment—not research and not content development, which are very different skills. In other TAs’ sections, students got bogged down in the content and struggled to complete the report, thereby learning little or nothing.
The following year, I was not invited back, which was fine with me. Apparently the professor of record started his new term by telling his TAs “not to do what Salvucci did.” In his hubris, he could not grasp that “what Salvucci did” was teach a bunch of engineers to write well for the first times in their lives.
I wish I could say he was the only boss who demanded I conform to some pedagogical absurdity in my career as an English professor. True to form, I always resisted, sometimes subverting the rules to maximize student learning. I even flagrantly broke the rules, skirting the limits of insubordination, to assure my students got what they needed.
I was accused of arrogance and self-righteousness, which was a rich exercise in psychological projection considering the accusers. I risked backlash to benefit my students because to do otherwise would be unconscionable.
That experience—bending and breaking rules to benefit my students—became the basis for my leadership philosophy and practice. I won’t lie. I sometimes got in trouble, a lot of trouble, but my conscious remains clear. Just as I refused to hurt students or waste their time, I refrained from hurting my employees, compromising values, or undermining the institutional mission to please some bully overlord.
And don’t get me wrong. Rules serve a valuable function and should be followed when they are a) useful and effective, b) evenly applied, and c) in service to the mission. Otherwise the rules are just arbitrary and counterproductive obstacles to progress.
Leadership is a tough racket. Leaders must bend or break rules when necessary, but they don’t let rules break them. Just as my students learned better because I put my neck out there, your team members will be more productive if you demonstrate your willingness to do the same.
Managers who do things the right way even though they know it’s wrong will make all sorts of excuses for their failures. Ultimately, it’s corrupting. Soon enough, doing the wrong thing will become their norm, even a habit. At that moment, they will have transformed into a mere boss. By contrast, true leaders never give in just to conform to the right way.
How do you approach rules? Do you tend to obey and enforce them no matter what, or do you assess them and proceed accordingly?
Leaders learn to assess rules and follow, bend, or break them as needed, and I can help.
Unlock the Great Leader Within! Download my free resource, the Transform To GREATness Toolkit, now!
I look forward to hearing from you.
Intro and outro podcast theme music by LiteSaturation from Pixabay.
Have you noticed that my podcast sound has improved in recent months?
I started using Descript to record and edit my podcast, and if you record sound and video, so should you. Descript’s AI assistance has transformed my process and improved my recordings. Now editing is a breeze!
Interested? Use my affiliate link to try Descript for free: https://get.descript.com/t8zotbxmi6ds.
Descript serves the novice and the expert to improve workflow and quality.
Let me know if you try it out and what you think.
Need an experienced speaker or a podcast guest? Invite me!
Searching for that elusive engaging, experienced, and knowledgeable speaker for your event or corporate training? Check out my Speaker’s Page.
Looking for an articulate, dynamic, and insightful podcast guest? Check out my Podcast Guest Page.
About Dr. Sal
I founded Guidance for Greatness to mentor rising professionals after serving 30 years in higher education as an English professor, dean, and VP.
In my speaking, writing, and coaching, I blend academic credentials (Ph.D. from Toronto, certificates from Harvard and ACE) with practical coaching certifications (Tiny Habits, Thrive Global) to offer something different: leadership development built upon human decency.
My mission? To guide today’s managers to become the next generation of great leaders.
I offer practical, values-driven strategies so that managers can lead authentically.
Why? Because great leaders aren't just effective managers—they're teachers whose example makes a true difference in the world.
It’s almost here!
Discover the practical strategies that transform good managers into exceptional leaders. Look for my new book, Greater than Great: How to Excel in Leadership through Learning, Logic, and Life to Make a True Difference in the World, in early 2025!
Share this post