Dogs That Hunt & Dogs That Don’t

I received a request to write my thoughts on the above title. I will below, but also want to remind that any suggestion for a paper is welcome as long as it has to do with power, leadership, dialogue and relationships. I think this request does.

I know dogs and I know people and the knowing of both is earned through life long experience with both.  As for dogs, we enjoyed a number of puppies and lived with them to their final days. They were all family to us. As for people, beyond family and friends, I worked professionally with hundreds of staff and with hundreds of adult clients over many years. Never studied dog behavior, just loved and enjoyed them. My study of human behavior has never ceased.  

So the subject at hand is about “Dogs That Hunt & Those That Don’t.” A leader asked the question and, of course, has people’s behavior in mind and not dogs. So I guess the real question is: why do some people take charge of problems and go off on their own to solve them and others do not? 

Those that take on the problem directly are the “hunters” and those that don’t or won’t are not “hunters.” Why, and what, if anything, can be done to change a person’s behavior so that they become “hunters?” Do leaders really benefit from that?

I believe that a group or organization with too many hunters and too few non-hunters is in trouble, or seeking trouble.  Again, as with this whole paper, in my opinion too many hunters create a competitive and possibly an aggressive environment. This harms and does not contribute to an organizations growth.   On the other hand, some hunters are assigned leaders; they are members of the leader’s Inner Circle and people accepted as leaders within the Inner Circle and of their own group. These unique and talented people know what they do and easily take charge when the situation calls for them to take over as leader.  They do contribute to the well being of their organization.  

It is very important that hunters and non-hunters be committed to the over-all organization and the head leader. The alternative and not uncommon results of too many hunters in any organization are the creation of a “sub-group” leader. The sub-group leader (always a hunter) has power as their primary motive and will work against the organization for their own benefit in the process poisoning the attitudes and behavior of their own group.

What I’ve learned working with both large and small groups is that a few well placed hunters are far more effective in reaching and going beyond an organization’s goals. Also, it is essential that hunters be recognized as the leaders they are and be included in an organization’s Inner Circle. 

Important to acknowledge that Hunters are role models and leaders and that they need the freedom to do what they do best and that is to take charge of the hunt. Balance between hunters and non-hunters is vital to an organization’s health.   Sy

I enjoy the hunt———Often the chase is enough———-How freeing this is.

I trust my leader———–To follow easy to do————–I am not alone.