leadership

Life has never been fond of repetition.

Nature itself seems to resist it. No two leaves are exactly alike, no two fingerprints are identical, and even no two sunsets unfold in precisely the same way, nor does the sky ever paint itself twice in quite the same colors.

The same is true of siblings who grow up beneath the same roof, gather around the same table and receive the same upbringing. They still differ in temperament, in the way they think, in how they respond to the world and even in the dreams they choose to follow. It is as though difference is not an exception to the order of life, but one of its most enduring laws.

And yet, we spend so much of our lives searching for a single formula that will work for everyone: one approach to raising every child, one method for teaching every student, one key to every relationship and one way of leading every team.

We often forget that human beings do not come with instruction manuals. There is no guide explaining how to understand a person, what moves them, what holds them back, or how best to reach them.

A human being has never been an equation whose results can simply be repeated. This may be why dealing with people tests our humility more than almost anything else. It asks us to accept that we will never understand everything; that what pleases one person may unsettle another; that the same words may comfort one heart and wound another; and that silence may feel like respect to one person, yet like neglect for someone else.

Perhaps this is what makes leadership one of the most complex of human experiences. Plans can be revised; processes can be improved; goals can be measured. People, however, cannot be understood through ready-made templates or managed by a single manual.

For all the leadership theories, studies and practices we have accumulated, one truth remains both simple and profound: a human being is always too complex to be reduced to a formula or an equation.

One of the greatest mistakes a leader can make is to use the self as the measure of everyone else: to assume that what motivates us will motivate them, that what convinces us will convince them and that what seems clear to us must surely be clear to everyone around us.

But people rarely work that way.

The leaders who leave the deepest mark are often those who learn to adapt to the differences between people without compromising their principles or lowering their standards. And once we understand this, we begin to understand something else: influence does not begin with changing people. It begins with understanding them.

Perhaps, then, the deeper lesson of leadership is not how to manage others, but how to master ourselves and learn to understand them.

It teaches us patience before judgment, listening before offering solutions, and the humility to set aside our assumptions long enough for another person to reveal who they truly are. Each new personality challenges an old belief. Each encounter reminds us, in a different way, that life was never meant to be navigated by a single formula.

For all the leadership theories, studies and practices we have accumulated, one truth remains both simple and profound: a human being is always too complex to be reduced to a formula or an equation.

That is why leadership, at its core, is an inner journey, one shaped by self-mastery, understanding, and the willingness to accept people as they are.

• Asma Al-Janahi is a UAE national with more than 10 years’ management experience in government excellence and the sports sector. She writes about management and social life.

Sept. 8, 2026 11:29 AM PT

WASHINGTON — Lonnie Bunch is stepping down from the leadership of the Smithsonian Institution following a tumultuous year in which President Trump tried to remake the portrayal of U.S. history by the Smithsonian museums and other cultural entities.

Bunch said in a news release Tuesday that he was departing the position he had held since 2019 “with very mixed emotions and heartfelt gratitude.” The Smithsonian said he would leave the post at the end of the year.

Bunch’s departure comes two months after a White House report branded the leaders of the Smithsonian Institution, especially at the National Museum of American History, as radical activists who cannot be trusted, an indication that Trump could be preparing to install his own team.

Anthea M. Hartig, the first female director of that museum, faced growing scrutiny from Trump and other Republicans over the summer after the White House Domestic Policy Council’s report saying the museum’s leadership doesn’t tell history “in a way that is inspiring, unifying, and worthy of our great republic.”

Three weeks after the report’s release, Trump ordered his administration to install signs in front of the U.S. history museum telling visitors that some of the exhibits are inaccurate. Hartig pushed back, telling lawmakers during congressional hearings that the report “does not fairly or accurately characterize the full body of work at the museum.”

There had been speculation that firings were in the offing. Trump doesn’t have the power to fire leaders at the Smithsonian with the swiftness he’s managed at other top cultural institutions in Washington, most notably the Kennedy Center, where a board of his supporters named him chairman.

The Smithsonian operates outside the executive branch and museum directors report to Bunch, who is subject to oversight from a Board of Regents that includes Vice President JD Vance, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, a bipartisan group of lawmakers and so-called citizen regents.

Roberts, who serves as Smithsonian’s chancellor, said in a release that Bunch had “pursued excellence in the telling of our nation’s story.”

The White House did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

The Smithsonian has been under examination by the Trump administration since 2025 as it has focused on the images and messages presented to the public as the nation approached its 250th anniversary.

A March 2025 executive order, Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History, led to signs being changed at federal parks, exhibits being altered or in some cases removed, and military bases being renamed. Trump specifically cited the National Museum of African American History and Culture and argued that the Smithsonian as a whole was engaging in a “concerted and widespread effort to rewrite our Nation’s history.”

Several months later, the White House ordered a wide-ranging review of the Smithsonian museums and exhibitions before the country’s 250th birthday, with a goal of aligning the institution’s content with Trump’s interpretation of American history.

In a letter sent to Bunch at the time, the White House detailed the steps it expected the organization to take as part of the announced review. The examination is of all public-facing content, including social media, exhibition text and educational materials, to “assess tone, historical framing, and alignment with American ideals,” according to the letter.

That review initially focused on eight museums — the National Museum of American History, the National Museum of Natural History, the National Museum of African American History and Culture, the National Museum of the American Indian, the National Air and Space Museum, the Smithsonian American Art Museum, the National Portrait Gallery and the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden.

Kinnard and Fields write for the Associated Press. Kinnard reported from Columbia, S.C.

The Pentagon on Friday fired the editor-in-chief of Stars and Stripes, as well as its publisher and a reporter, the editor said. He said he was dismissed for insubordination after an interview he gave that objected to potential censorship by the U.S. military.

Erik Slavin, editor-in-chief of the military newspaper that is partly funded by the Pentagon but has a long legacy of editorial independence, told The Associated Press that he and the others had received notices of separation.

The moves come at a time when the Trump administration, in its second term, has been increasingly aggressive and combative toward the news media — including sharply curtailing Pentagon access for the press corps that covers the Defense Department. Trump or other parts of the executive branch have also, in policy and in the courts, grappled with the Wall Street Journal, the Associated Press and The New York Times — in addition to using the FCC to target broadcast networks.

Slavin said he was being fired “for stating in a CBS interview that hypothetical censorship of news for service members would constitute a red line.” He said he stands by the principle “that Stars and Stripes must remain editorially independent.”

Earlier this week, publisher Max Lederer announced his retirement effective at the end of September. He too received a separation notice, according to Slavin, as did Middle East reporter Lara Korte, who was cited for the same CBS interview as Slavin. Neither Lederer nor Korte immediately responded to requests for comment.

Lederer made his announcement a few weeks after the Pentagon installed a new deputy publisher, an active duty service member, under Lederer at the newspaper without his prior knowledge. Three Democratic senators on Thursday wrote to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, asking why the new deputy — Navy Capt. William Urban — had been installed.

It was unclear whether Urban would now become the new publisher. In an email message to the AP, Urban said, “I am currently the Military Deputy to the Publisher. I can’t comment on what my role will be in the future.”

The retirement of Lederer, who had been at Stars and Stripes for three decades and publisher since 2007, comes as Hegseth’s Pentagon moves to exert editorial control and eliminate what it asserts are “woke distractions.”

Lederer, the second full-time civilian in the position, wrote in a staff memo that it had “become clear that my philosophy of leadership, and my understanding of the value and mission of Stars and Stripes, differ in fundamental ways from the direction the leadership of the Department of Defense has for the organization.”

In April, the Pentagon fired Jacqueline Smith, ombudsman for the newspaper, whose job had been to safeguard editorial independence.

Noveck writes for the Associated Press.

Bob Iger’s purchase of the Lakers isn’t the former Disney boss’s first foray into ownership of a professional sports franchise in Southern California: Twenty-five months ago Iger and his wife, Willow Bay, dean of the Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, acquired a controlling interest in soccer club Angel City for $50 million.

And while the NWSL is a long way from the NBA — and $50 million is a long way from the $12.5 billion the basketball team sold for Wednesday — the Iger family’s management of the women’s soccer team may hint at what’s in store for the Lakers.

Spoiler alert: it’s not all good.

Iger’s investment pushed Angel City’s valuation to $250 million, making it the world’s most valuable women’s professional sports franchise. And six months after taking over the team, Bay cut the ribbon on a multi-million-dollar training complex at Cal Lutheran University in Thousand Oaks, which added to the team’s worth.

“Bob and I were very clear about investing the resources in this team and the people who lead and manage it. And most certainly the women who play for it,” Bay said at the time. “We know how important it is to do our best to bring a championship to this city.”

Yet also under Iger and Bay’s leadership, Angel City’s average attendance has fallen more than 20% and the team has yet to make the playoffs or post a winning record. The roster does not have a superstar player or even a regular starter on the women’s national team — with the salary of defender Gisele Thompson, the team’s highest-paid player, ranked 19th in the 16-team league. And the club is on its fourth manager, including interim coaches, and its second president of business operations in two years as Bay maneuvers to put her own stamp on the team.

However Mark Parsons, Iger and Bay’s hand-picked sporting director, lauds the team’s new owners, saying his staff has doubled in his 20 months at Angel City and the club is finally headed in the right direction.

“They gave us the resources,” said Parsons, who previously built struggling teams into NWSL finalists in Washington and Portland. “They’ve delivered upon that. We are investing in sporting staff and resources and facilities and consultants and experts around the world to support our athletes.

“Probably as good as anyone right now.”

Parsons said he speaks frequently with Bay, who has been hands-on in running Angel City. Iger will likely be the more active partner in managing the Lakers.

“Willow is one of the best leaders I’ve ever been around in my life, never mind my career,” Parsons said. “Spending time with Willow and Bob is an education in leadership and life. They are really special leaders.

“The best compliment I could give them is when I was in my final interview, who they were in that moment was the same people I’ve met when we’ve had good moments or stressful moments to navigate together.”