Marius and the Romans

In the ancient Roman Republic, the Roman army was a formidable fighting machine.  Before 100 BC, the Romans had already defeated their main commercial rival, Carthage, in a series of bloody wars. They had subdued Greece and extended their sovereignty over all of Italy while showing an aggressive bent on both land and sea throughout the entire Mediterranean.  And yet, as good as their army was, it was about to get much better.

Traditionally composed of volunteers from upper and middle class land holders, the Roman legions had been primarily designed for short campaigns, not long occupations or year round duty.  Farmers had to farm, merchants had to trade.  They could not afford to mimic a professional army.  But the Republic's obligations had outstripped the norm.  A professional army was critical to maintain order in newly conquered provinces.

Recognizing this, one of Rome's most extraordinary generals rose to prominence in the last decades of the Republic.  Gaius Marius, a "new man", or a man not from the traditional Roman sphere, had emerged as a leader of drive and genius.  Marius was not only a keen tactician and an administrative talent, he was also a man who understood human nature.

Under Marius, soldiers were, for the first time, recruited from the lower classes.  This was done to meet the needs of the expanding Republic, as well as to fuel Marius' own vaulting ambitions.  These new soldiers had no lands to call their own.  They were not attached to long family lines, traditions, or the political life of the state.  When they joined Marius' legions, they joined an army rapidly turning professional.  The army became their home.

Marius recognized that the new legions had to develop traditions and bonds of attachment that replaced the traditional bonds common in the legions of the old Republic, bonds that had as much to do with attachments OUTSIDE the legion as within.  The canny general introduced the first legionary eagle standards, as well as badges that hung from the standards commemorating a particular legion's victories.  He introduced other standards as well as uniform badges of rank and awards.

Soon, the legions became extremely attached to their "eagles".  To bear the eagle standard was an honor bestowed on high achievers.  To lose it in battle was a disgrace scarcely to be borne.  In the midst of fear and slaughter, the legionary standard became the rallying point of the entire legion.  It became the identity in concrete form of the body of men, and indeed of the individuals, that made up the legion.

In addition to the "eagle", the new legions gave themselves the nickname "Marius' mules", an appellation referring to the long marches carrying loads of heavy arms, armor, and equipment their general subjected them to.  It was a name conjured from pride and an attachment to something bigger than themselves.  And it came from them.  Marius did not subject them to a name that did not spring from shared hardship and adventure.  An identity has more meaning, the strength of the bond is greater when it comes from the shared experiences of the team.  Marius knew that.  But the name itself was a symbol, something all could rally around.

Before the time of Marius, the average legionary certainly identified himself by the legion he was in, but even more so by the tribe he was from, the position he held, and his family of origin.  In Marius' army and from that time on in both Republic and Empire, the average legionary identified himself with the legion, with the army, and with the general that led them.   The symbol of the eagle standard represented the new feeling and the new attachment of the new soldiers of Rome.

Symbols such as flags, pennons, logos, colors, uniforms and such are bonding mechanisms that are physical manifestations of shared attachment to a common experience.  They are not, however, the REASONS why people choose to attach to a particular team or group of people.  Some of these reasons we have briefly mentioned, others will be discussed as we continue our journey.  For now, it is sufficient to realize that symbols focus the core of the reason we attach, whatever that is, and make it known to others not only internal to the team, but external as well.

Symbols have great import in the modern world of business also.  Every company begins with a reason to exist, which shall be discussed, and then quickly moves to a name, an identity, a logo, company colors, perhaps a motto, a mission statement, and perhaps even a uniform.  Logo's, of course, are huge.  Think the Nike "Swoosh", the Taco "Bell", the Microsoft graphic, the McDonald's "arches", Disney's "Mickey Mouse".  For each one of us, these symbols draw an association in our minds, an association that depends on both our shared cultural experiences as well as our individual experiences with the company represented by the symbol.

For those who belong to such organizations however, the symbol represents a tradition, history, and shared corporate "culture". Disney, for instance, has Mickey Mouse.  What has Mickey come to represent as Disney has evolved and changed over the years?  From a small studio primarily concerned with animated pictures, Disney has grown into a global behemoth straddling motion pictures, TV, theme parks, and a culture of marketing and merchandising that dwarfs its' humble beginnings.  Mickey Mouse has gone global.  Who in the world doesn't recognize his silhouette?  But along with growth, Mickey himself now represents all that Disney was, is, and will become.

Think of your own company, school, or organization.  What symbols represent what it is you do?  What do they mean to you?   As we shall see, symbols by themselves mean nothing.  They represent the value we give to them.  Some symbols acquire tremendous power because we attribute a history, traditions, characteristics and a life to the particular symbol.  I'm sure you can think of various symbols that have informed your life where this is so, and just as many that mean absolutely nothing to you.

The inspirational leader of any team knows and appreciates the value of symbols in drawing people together and, just as importantly, in excluding others from the group.  As we mentioned earlier, the team is not only defined for what it IS but, is also defined by what it is NOT.   In teambuilding and leadership, this is a bare fact.  While it is human nature to want to feel part of something bigger than ourselves, it is also our nature to feel that what we belong to is special, valued, and different. 

The value that we attach to symbols that define our group is partially dependent on how exclusive we feel the group is.  To be part of a group that is large, all inclusive and "soulless" makes us feel detached and valueless.  On the other hand, to belong to a team that is "elite", or that requires special skills or attributes to join makes each one of us feel unique, valued, and special.

You will probably have no problem thinking of attachments you have that have notable symbols representing them.  As alumni of high school or college institutions, you most likely have a shirt or hat or some other piece of gear that sports your favorite school's symbol.  Although you certainly realize that you have an attachment to that particular school, it can certainly feel good to let everyone else know also.

 Therefore, when the inspirational leader looks to form powerful bonds within a team that will allow the team to maximize its' potential, he looks to symbols to help him get there.  He looks to symbols as objects of attachment, as rallying points.  The value those symbols have will depend on all of the other things the inspirational leader needs to do to create the environment where everyone wants to be part of something bigger.

Recognizing this, the inspirational leader will allow the team to develop their symbols.  He will not force or in any way try to impose symbols on the group.  These symbols will flow from the group's need to identify a concrete rallying point.  Shared experience, shared effort, and shared values will inform the development of symbols.

I remember learning that lesson very well when I was coaching freshman rowing at the Naval Academy and at Georgetown University.  My first year at Navy, we had a tremendous group of athletes and personalities. Some had been recruited specifically because of their high school rowing prowess while the vast majority of the group had been recruited straight off of campus. 

I had asked a friend of mine, Chris Clark, to be my assistant that year and as we surveyed the situation, we knew we had something special.  We will talk later about the influence of personality on any group, and that in no way can ever be underestimated.  Having said that, the sheer physical talent was impressive, as were the resources and potential available to us in every other way.

Chris and I set out our expectations for the group on the first day we met them and immediately began hard training.  As the fall progressed, the team's personality began to emerge.  Naturally, it mirrored the personalities of the coaches somewhat as well.  I was tempted to just give them a name that further defined them, but I held off.  It was evident that this group had an independent spirit to it. 

Sure enough, about half way through the fall, we were standing on the dock talking to a group of the more vocal and talented members when Chris mentioned that perhaps one of the team members was "acting like a Piker".  The guys were unsure exactly what "Piker" meant, but that didn't stop them from delightedly leaping on the term and adopting it for their own.  In a little while, they had defined the term themselves and agreed that, yes, they were indeed, Pikers. 

Once they had a name, they progressed to a Piker symbol (a vicious looking fish), a Piker shirt, a special Piker greeting (Semper Pike), and various other defining symbols.  Later, when they were juniors, they had a special Piker ring made for everyone on the team who had survived that first year, the coaches included.  I will have more to say about the Pikers later!

The next year was very different.  Another great crop of kids, another great year looming.  This group was different, however.  It was physically bigger, but not as experienced.  The personalities were quieter and took longer to emerge.  Unlike the previous year, Chris and I took this group over early in the summer and had a while to see them progress through their plebe summer trials and tribulations.  It seemed that they would be more truly "our" group than even the Pikers had been.  But because I did not see the same kind of vocal leaders emerge early as had happened the year before, I became impatient and imposed a name upon them.  They were big, strong, and tough but had a slightly "thuggish" look to them.  Therefore, they became the "Thugs".

But all of the things that had followed the year before when the Pikers had discovered for themselves their own personality did not happen this year.  The Thugs never warmed to the name I had given them and they never seemed to develop the camaraderie I had come to expect from the Pikers.

Fortunately, I learned my lesson and my subsequent crews (Spears, Weasels, Dingoes...) were allowed to develop who they were before they named themselves.  Once they had done so, the name and all of the symbols attached to it gained tremendous power.

As team leaders, managers, coaches, or whatever, to be an inspirational leader means to foster the creation of, if needed, or to help give meaning to symbols that define an organization.  First they exist, then life and power is breathed into them over the course of their existence based on how we, as members of the team, and as others who are external to the team, give meaning to them.

In our corporate teambuilding and leadership development programs, we usually begin by randomly dividing the group into teams.  Each team initially is defined by a number.  The teams have, as yet, no real purpose.  We ask each new team to sit down together, talk amongst themselves for a few minutes, and come up with a name for their team that takes into account, as best they are able, the traits shared in common by the team.  For instance, every team member could be left handed or blonde or blue eyed, or, their very difference in any trait is in itself a commonality.

We instruct them also to come up with a team motto and mascot.  All of this is drawn on a "banner" with magic marker and other materials.  Now, again, they have no real "goal" at this point.  In some of our programs, each team is also issued shirts and hats with a unique color that separates them from the other teams.  After a little while, we'll have team representatives explain the meaning of their name, motto, and mascot.  We'll then announce that we have to make a few changes in certain teams, switching a few people around.

The reaction of everyone is usually instantaneous.  The body language screams resistance.  Many times, there are looks of real dismay and shouts of "No!" and "why do we have to do that?"  Remember, these teams have been together for only about 10 minutes!  What has happened to them?  If they had been asked to change certain members immediately after the team had been formed, there would have been little resistance.  No one knew anything about anyone.  There was no time to "bond".  But, because everyone wants to feel part of something bigger than themselves, bonding mechanisms kick into play almost instantaneously.  Five minutes after they were formed, they can now define themselves by common traits, a unique name, (even a number!), unique mascot and unique motto. If given shirts and hats, they also have a unique color scheme.  To switch out of the group is to be excluded from the tribe and forced to join another "alien" tribe.  No one wants to do that.

The point is, of course, that although at the beginning of the session there was no real REASON to have a team and no overtly obvious bonding mechanisms, the symbols themselves helped to define and set apart the team.  Each team mate gave value to the symbols.  What value did they have?  It depended totally on what value the team gave to them.  But they all meant something.  They gave expression to the common agreement to believe in something or to express something about themselves, both as individuals and as a team.

In the end, such exercises reinforce the point that everyone wants to feel part of something bigger than themselves.  Symbols as bonding mechanisms are just part of creating the environment where champions are inevitable.   They are tools that the inspirational leader uses to help put structure into the environment.  They are usually outgrowths of the fundamentally more powerful bonding mechanisms that help define high performance teams that we will discuss in the following chapters. 

Our second secret of Inspirational leadership focuses on the need for all of us to feel valued, to have a purpose in life that fulfills and informs who we are.  In the next installment of our story of ancient Greece, we will again pick up the tale of Lysis, soldier of Athens.  The bonds that tie him to his city, his religion, and his clan are thick and powerful.  Each of them is represented by symbols, tradition, and history.  But while he is separated from the physical manifestation of those bonds, he must interact with people and with leaders who have decidedly different means of valuing their people.