We've just celebrated Thanksgiving and enjoyed our annual turkey dinner.

Benjamin Franklin once proposed that the turkey be our national bird, instead of the eagle. The eagle was chosen and now enjoys iconic stature, whereas the turkey has become synonymous with fumbling incompetence, as in "He's such a turkey!"

The reputations of the two birds evolved over time and represent an interesting lesson for leaders. What do I mean?

Reputations can result from unintended or misguided actions. Eagles can become known as turkeys, through no fault of their own.

A few examples:

William was a young, ambitious, smart, and confident consultant. Early in his career, he asked questions of senior leaders in a public forum. One of the senior leaders decided that his questions were a sign of disrespect and repeated the story over the next several years, serving as the primary conveyer of a negative reputation that William became saddled with. As a result, William's advancement was severely limited, as was his ability to provide value to the business - all because one person misconstrued William's questions.

Gwen was at the wrong place at the wrong time - when she was first hired, she was assigned to a project with high turnover that needed staff. The turnover was the result of a combination of factors, including a demeaning and arbitrary project manager, excessive travel, a demanding client, and a badly negotiated contract. The project developed a reputation across the company for futility and Gwen became linked to this reputation. Whenever she was being considered for work thereafter, the project's problems were brought up and decisions about her future assignments were influenced unfairly.

Ali began his career in the accounting department and, after he earned his MBA, moved into the business development group working on the financial aspects of large proposals. Despite his interest and knowledge in other areas, he was seen mostly as a "numbers guy." He wasn't recognized for his strategic thinking or problem-solving skills. He was only able to transcend the perception of him as a bean counter by moving to another firm.

In each of these cases, reputations were based on limited or specious data that contributed to a lasting and negative effect on the careers of William, Gwen, and Ali. What can leaders do to avoid this dilemma?

Don't blindly accept others' assessments. There is a tendency to accept what other people say about someone without probing into their thinking process or questioning the proof that could validate or refute the assessment. Instead of blithely accepting what other people say about someone, especially if it is negative, ask for the reasons and the support for their assessment.

Judge people on your own. Instead of accepting what others say, observe and assess the person for yourself and make a decision based on the data you collect directly about their performance and value.

Let people know if their reputation is hurting their career. I've been involved in several cases where individuals have suffered from negative reputations for years and have never been apprised of it by anyone.

When I inform people of the negative reputations they have, the response is often, "I never knew. Why didn't anyone tell me?!" And, once they learn about the reputation they been burdened with for years, they normally take steps to change how they're seen.

Are there turkeys in your company, people whose poor reputations are undeserved? If so, what can you do to help rebuild their reputations and ensure that in the future your eagles aren't inadvertently transformed into turkeys?

Not too long ago, USA Today had an article touting the benefits of mentors for women leaders, stating, "If there is a woman behind every successful man, it may be as true that there is a man behind every successful woman."

What about you? Have you had mentors who have shaped your career? Do you still keep in touch? Have you acknowledged their help publicly? Have you thanked them personally for their support and guidance?

And, have you taken others under your wing as their mentor, so they can become the leaders of the future?

Matthew Stewart, in The Management Myth, lambastes managerial thinking that purports to be scientific but which, for the most part, is sloppy thinking designed to sell books and burnish the reputations and pocketbooks of the authors.

What do you think about the science of management? Is it, as Stewart argues, a fraud perpetrated on a gullible public or is there substance and value in management books?

Are there practical and tested guidelines that you follow as a leader? Would they stand the test of time and a rigorous analysis?

Email archie@archietinelli.com