A good leader is one who is able to engage members and get results. A great leader is one who listens to and empowers members to be innovative in looking beyond the present, to guide the path to strategic positioning, and places a premium on collaborative goal setting.
A great leader is humble. They really understand that their job is to focus on the goal and not on themselves. Good leaders often compete for credit with the results in order to gain more influence or authority.
"To lead people, walk beside them ... As for the best leaders, the people do not notice their existence. The next best, the people honor and praise. The next, the people fear; and the next, the people hate ... When the best leader's work is done the people say, 'We did it ourselves!'"
Great leaders don’t operate in a vacuum assuming that they always know best. They know to consider input from everyone impacted by a decision in order to get buy-in from their team, stay grounded and remain objective. Although they retain final say, they’re team will stand behind the decision knowing that they’re input was wholeheartedly weighed and considered.
James C. Collins loves to tell the story of Darwin E. Smith, someone most readers have probably never heard of. As Smith was ending two decades at the helm of Kimberly-Clark, maker of Kleenex and other personal-use paper products, he was asked what had driven him, what had he done to make his company so successful over time.
"I was just trying to become qualified for the job," Collins quotes Smith as saying.
. Communicate as often as possible with people on your staff (one on one communication).Make sure the people that work for you understand that you value their input and contribution and that you are there to support their growth and development.www.commlabindia.com

“To become truly great, one has to stand with people, not above them.” - Marleen
Charles de Montesquieu
The beauty of a great leader’s humility is it actually inspires others to use all of their talents, skills and gifts because there room for others to show up in a powerful way.
One of the greatest traits of great leaders is their humility. It keeps leaders rise above the rest. It makes them totally different and distinct from others. It requires humility to accept failures. It requires humility to give credit to the deserving people rather than swallowing. In case of a failure, a good leader says, “We have failed because of my mistake”. In case of a success a good leader says, “We have succeeded because of the efforts of our team”. It requires not only courage but also humility to accept the debacles and failures. To put it in the words of Eisenhower, “A sense of humility is a quality I have observed in every leader whom I have deeply admired. I have seen Winston Churchill with humble tears of gratitude on his cheeks as he thanked people for their help to Britain and the Allied cause. My own conviction is that every leader should have enough humility to accept, publicly, the responsibility for the mistakes of the subordinates he has himself selected and, likewise, to give them credit, publicly, for their triumphs.”

Read more: http://profmsr.blogspot.com/2009/09/is-humility-hallmark-of-great-leaders.html#ixzz283u4afou
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution

For the Good Leader the follower is following a person--a sort of personality cult, whereas for an Inspirational Leader the follower is following a dream.
What makes a good leader is the ability to conform to accepted standards but a great leader redefines the standard. Great leaders, because of their passion, determination and perseverance, inspire others to produce at a different level, to give more than is commonly accepted.
. As the old saying goes, the definition of a leader is someone who has followers. Therefore, the definition of an inspirational leader is someone who has inspired followers. But a truly inspirational leader has the passion, the commitment, the sensitivity and the vision to see what is possible, on one hand, and also to persuade people to follow that dream on the other. Altogether, a good leader will motivate and encourage others to great works but a truly inspirational leader will help others to discover themselves and find their own greatness. An inspirational leader is the one who can get much from an average employee and a good leader is the one who can get much from the good employee.

Obama brought much attention to the defeat of the DREAM Act, calling its failure “my biggest disappointment. One thing I hope people have seen during this lame duck: I am persistent,” the president said. “I am persistent. You know, if I believe in something strongly, I stay on it. And I believe strongly in this.”

Persistence, commitment, and dedication. It’s like they always say: “Winners don’t quit, and quitters don’t win.” Nothing worth having comes easily. When setbacks crop up, leaders don’t flag because they always have their eyes on the prize.
Abraham Lincoln. "He was reserved, awkward, gangly and had personal humility." But he had a goal of preserving the union, Collins said, even if 600,000 people, including himself, had to die to accomplish that.
Persistence is one of the key characteristics of great leaders. Gaining it requires determination and a mindset that — no matter what happens — you will stick to your principles and goals. Persistence in leadership is analogous to running a marathon. To run a successful marathon you have to spend ample time (months or more) preparing. The time you spend, and what you do leading up to the race, will determine how well you perform during the race. To succeed in leadership you have to work hard and continually hone your interpersonal skills. You find ways to motivate successful teamwork and positive interaction.
Great leaders are persistent. They persevere through trials and develop the ability to weather tough storms. Calvin Coolidge, 30th US President, summed it up nicely:
Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent.
Success in leadership comes from developing and perfecting persistence and determination.
—
The Product Management Perspective: The importance of persistence in creating great products cannot be overstated. Things do not always go as planned. Great product managers learn from past mistakes and continue to press forward regardless of the obstacles they face. Product success does not come overnight, but instead comes over time, though consistent application of sound principles.

Lerbinger[7] categorized seven types of crises 1. Natural disaster 2. Technological crises 3. Confrontation 4. Malevolence 5. Organizational Misdeeds 6. Workplace Violence 7. Rumours 8. Terrorist attacks/man-made disasters

1. There is something about a big snowstorm that brings out the best, or more often the worst, in big city mayors. If, as former Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill once said, "All politics is local," then you would think that the first hint of snow in the forecast would prompt mayors to relocate their offices temporarily to where the snowplows are dispatched. 2. Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who recently won a third term, and is widely regarded as an adept city leader, has come under fire for inefficient snow removal in New York City. Most of the complaints came from residents in the so-called outer boroughs — e.g., the four that are not Manhattan. 3. But across the Hudson, Newark Mayor Cory Booker has received acclaim for his response to the nor'easter snowfall, despite taking flak on a host of other matters. Not content with supervising removal, he plunged in with a shovel, helping to extricate cars, clear walkways, and in one instance deliver diapers to a housebound mother. He also tweeted his first-hand observations of the snow to his more than one million Twitter followers. 4. We like to see our elected officials in action. The contrast between Bloomberg's reception and Booker's can serve as a lesson for anyone in a position of authority. Here are some tips for the next big storm that hits your office: 5. Take a moment to figure out what's going on. An executive I know experienced a major disruption in service to his company. He was the person in charge and he told me that at the first response meeting everyone started talking at once. The chatter was nervous response — not constructive — so he delegated responsibilities and then called for a subsequent meeting in an hour's time. This also helped to impose order on a chaotic situation. 6. Act promptly, not hurriedly. A leader must provide direction and respond to the situation in a timely fashion. But acting hurriedly only makes people nervous. You can act with deliberateness as well as speed. Or as legendary coach John Wooden advised, "Be quick but don't hurry." 7. Manage expectations. When trouble strikes, people want it to be over right now — but seldom is this kind of quick resolution possible. It falls to the leader in charge to address the size and scope of the crisis. You don't want to alarm people, yet do not be afraid to speak to the magnitude of the situation. Winston Churchill was a master at summing up challenges but offering a response at the same time. As he famously said when taking office in 1940, "You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word. It is victory; victory at all costs; victory in spite of all terror; victory, however long and hard the road may be, for without victory there is no survival." 8. Demonstrate control. When things are happening quickly, no one may have control, but a leader can assume control. That is, you do not control the disaster — be it man-made or natural — but you can control the response. A leader puts himself into the action and brings the people and resources to bear. Think of Red Adair, who made a name for himself putting out oil fires that no one else could. A raging blaze may seem uncontrollable but Adair knew could control the way it was extinguished. 9. Keep loose. Not only does this apply to personal demeanor — a leader can never afford to lose composure — it applies to the leader's ability to adapt rapidly. A hallmark of a crisis is its ability to change quickly; your first response may not be your final response. In these situations, a leader cannot be wedded to a single strategy. She must continue to take in new information, listen carefully and consult with the frontline experts who know what's happening. 10. As much as we like to see senior executives pitch in and help with the heavy lifting, there is a limit. A senior executive's prime role is setting direction. If he or she is engaged too much in front line responsibility, then who is doing the vision thing? Some executives still enjoy doing that hands-on work; they like the rush of adrenaline that comes from direct action. Too bad. That is not their job any more. 11. Leaders have another important role during a crisis and that is to provide perspective. As Mike Useem has written in The Go Point, an insightful study of decision-making, effective leaders can often do more by standing back from the action. 12. It is why, as Useem notes, that the team leader in mountaineering expeditions often remains at base camp rather than hiking to the summit. That way, if trouble strikes, he can direct the response with the perspective that comes from seeing the mountain as a whole and the conditions that affect the summit team. 13. The measure of a leader is often tested during a crisis. And those leaders who can engage directly, but still maintain their sense of perspective, are the ones that will help the organization survive. 14. 15. Seeing things for what they are. Strong crisis leaders live on the front end of reality. They recognize events and their significance and do not shy away from the consequences of what they see. Intellectual integrity is a key component of their DNA; they think of what is best for the organization, not their own personal gain. 16. Strategy and detail. They are able to see the big picture. They can see all of the moving parts and understand what is cause and what is effect. They get below the 30,000ft level and can dig deep into detail without being mired in it. They quickly develop a very detailed knowledge of the issues. This ability further enhances their capacity to view the problem realistically. 17. Multiple options. When they have identified the problems, they are willing to consider multiple approaches to how these may be addressed. Initially, they engage others in brainstorming potential solutions without judgment, even though they may have a preferred solution in mind. They are confident enough to know and accept that their way may not be the best way. 18. Decisiveness. Taking ownership of the solution means being decisive. When they feel they have listened to the best advice they are willing to make a decision. Strong leaders will use a combination of real-time data along with their "gut"; the wisdom built on years of leadership experience. When they make that decision they know they need to "sell" it to key stakeholders and work tirelessly to ensure organizational resistance does not block the effectiveness of the decision. 19. Collaboration. Strong leaders take ownership of the problem. They understand, however, that a long-term solution requires the input and involvement of many stakeholders. They identify those individuals and work together towards a solution that most support and most can live with. 20. Listen to unpopular advice. Unsuccessful leaders listen only to those who agree with them and often encourage one-dimensional thinking. The successful crisis leader seeks out individuals who have a different perspective on an issue. They include individuals with whom they may not agree and whose advice may be contrary to that of their closest advisers. 21. Calm, courageous and positive. They feel a sense of urgency and remain even tempered. They recognize that an organization, a country or the world is watching them and know that how they present themselves will provide non verbal signals to the audience. They will deliver bad news when they need to and do it in a way that avoids panic and provides a realistic level of hope for the future. Above all, they are courageous enough to make decisions they believe to be the right ones, regardless of whether they are the more popular ones. 22. Take risk in the face of risk. Crises often bring the leader face-to-face with a set of situations they have not previously seen. There are questions to which they do not know the answers. Gathering contrarian viewpoints from individuals with whom they might not agree, but respect, likely means they may create solutions not previously tried, and outcomes of which may be unknown. If it is the best solution, however, the strong leader is prepared to take the calculated risk. 23. 80% rule. Leaders certainly want to make the right set of decisions. Strong leaders understand they will not always have all of the information they might like. They know that making an imperfect decision can often be better than making no decision at all. Even if the decision needs to be "fine tuned" for implementation they are comfortable making it. 24. Prepare to admit mistakes. Courageous leaders who take calculated risks will undoubtedly make mistakes at some point. Deep crises require continuous decision making. The volume of decisions required in multi-faceted crises can almost guarantee that not every decision will be 100% correct. Strong leaders are prepared to admit their mistakes.

Tylenol (Johnson and Johnson)
In the fall of 1982, a murderer added 65 milligrams of cyanide to some Tylenol capsules on store shelves, killing seven people, including three in one family. Johnson & Johnson recalled and destroyed 31 million capsules at a cost of $100 million. The affable CEO, James Burke, appeared in television ads and at news conferences informing consumers of the company's actions. Tamper-resistant packaging was rapidly introduced, and Tylenol sales swiftly bounced back to near pre-crisis levels.[24]
When another bottle of tainted Tylenol was discovered in a store, it took only a matter of minutes for the manufacturer to issue a nationwide warning that people should not use the medication in its capsule form.[25]
Signal detection
Si Sense-making: represents an attempt to create order and make sense, retrospectively, of what occurs. Perspective-taking: the ability to consider another person's or group's point of view.
[edit]Preparation and prevention
It is during this stage that crisis handlers begin preparing for or averting the crisis that had been foreshadowed in the signal detection stage. Organizations such as the Red Cross's primary mission is to prepare for and prevent the escalation of crisis events. Walmart has been described as an emergency relief standard bearer[citation needed] after having witnessed the incredibly speedy and well-coordinated effort to get supplies to the Gulf Coast of the United States in anticipation of Hurricane Katrina.
[edit]Containment and damage control
Usually the most vivid stage, the goal of crisis containment and damage control is to limit the reputational, financial, safety, and other threats to firm survival. Crisis handlers work diligently during this stage to bring the crisis to an end as quickly as possible to limit the negative publicity to the organization, and move into the business recovery phase.
[edit]Business recovery
When crisis hits, organizations must be able to carry on with their business in the midst of the crisis while simultaneously planning for how they will recover from the damage the crisis caused. Crisis handlers not only engage in continuity planning (determining the people, financial, and technology resources needed to keep the organization running), but will also actively pursue organizational resilience.
[edit]Learning
In the wake of a crisis, organizational decision makers adopt a learning orientation and use prior experience to develop new routines and behaviors that ultimately change the way the organization operates. The best leaders recognize this and are purposeful and skillful in finding the learning opportunities inherent in every crisis situation.

In recent postings, we’ve taken a close look at the role of the CEO in crisis management. In the final posting on this topic for now, we list some of the key qualities required by a chief executive in this context:
1) Leadership
Leadership is a quality one would expect from a CEO at all times, but the stakes are even higher in a crisis: it is the ultimate test for a senior management team. The outside world will re-evaluate the ability of the senior management team – and the worth of the business – dependent on how it manages the crisis. Demonstrating leadership and the cool-headed ability to make critical decisions under the most intense pressure are pre-requisites for success.
2) Empathy
A focus on and understanding of the effect of your crisis on impacted stakeholders is essential, and that requires a CEO who can listen as well as talk. Conversely, a focus on what the crisis means for our business, or worse, what the crisis means for me as CEO is guaranteed to alienate stakeholders and make a bad situation even worse. It’s one of the key reasons that Tony Hayward endured such a torrid time during his leadership of the BP crisis.
3) Strategic planning
Reacting to a crisis is rarely an effective approach – it means that the crisis manages the business rather than the other way round. So, an ability to be clear on the objectives for crisis management activity, to see into the future and therefore plan the best course of action are invaluable skills for a CEO in crisis management mode.
4) Integrity
Nothing does more damage in a crisis than double-talk or downright dishonesty. A CEO who is straight-forward, honest and acknowledges responsibility will retain credibility and therefore the ability to be heard during a crisis. This is essential if the organisation is to exert influence on how the situation plays out, and emerge unscathed at the other end.
5) Communication
If the CEO is to play the role of lead media spokesperson, they must be a supreme communicator. The words of the CEO will be tested, analysed and used against them if they slip up. And when we’re managing reputation in an online age, we’re no longer talking about today’s press comment being tomorrow’s fish and chip paper. Twitter ensures that today’s gaffe has gone twice round the world by tomorrow and is preserved forever on YouTube and/or Google.
Being a CEO in a crisis tests business heads to the limit. People who have been successful when running “business as usual” can quickly find their world unravelling when crisis strikes. Others rise to the challenge, proving that they are not just great managers, but truly great leaders.

The Three Fundamentals Of Effective Leadership

Through more than 40 years of service in the military, in higher education and with nonprofits, I've been privileged to work with and learn from superb leaders, from the young instructors who taught me how to fly airplanes for the U.S. Navy to the very smart group of corporate chief executive officers I met during a recent business trip to Asia.
These talented people have differed widely in their personality traits and life stories. Some have been charismatic, some very modest. Some came from poor backgrounds, others grew up amid great wealth. Some of them came by their leadership abilities naturally, and many others worked hard at developing them.
But all of these men and women have shared three critically important skills: They have been driven by an inspiring vision of success. They have excelled at communication. And they have exercised superior judgment.
To lead our organizations effectively through today's economic turmoil, we all will benefit if we master those very same skills.
Leadership success always starts with vision. Henry Ford dreamed of a car families could afford. Steve Jobs dreamed of an easy-to-use computer that would unleash creativity. Nelson Mandela dreamed of an integrated, prosperous South Africa.
These were heady ideas, and they attracted more than a few sneers. But they weren't the daydreams of lazy people with too much time on their hands. They were deep-seated passions, magnetic enough to capture the minds of just a few devoted followers at first but ultimately the imaginations of millions of women and men.
A compelling vision has that power. It inspires, clarifies and focuses the work of individuals--and preferably entire organizations--for a lengthy span of time. Before you embark on any leadership enterprise, stop and take a hard look at your vision of success. What is it? Do you even have one? Often, in the rush to get things done, to launch a new project or product, we ask people to get behind our efforts without ever really giving them a good reason why.
Your vision need not be as grandiose as Mandela's. It probably shouldn't be, unless you have Mandela's phenomenal array of talents and experience. If you do, I'd like to hear from you right away. It's fine to start with something smaller, like launching a new product line in your business, or publishing a book or instituting new technology to improve your customer service. Just pick something that matters, something that excites both you and your colleagues.
But even an incredibly compelling vision won't do much good if it remains only in your head. That brings us to the second key skill: communication. For busy leaders, there's always the temptation to keep your thoughts to yourself, often because there's so much other pressing work to do. Stopping to talk and listen can seem a waste of time. It's easy to cut off debate too early, especially in this economically trying moment.
Still, mustering the discipline and time to share strategies with your staff or talk directly with your clients is only half the fight. You still need to communicate effectively--and that means being your organization's chief listening officer. When key information needs to be shared, some leaders will simply send out a memo or give a speech (without leaving time for questions) and check "communication" off their list. Later on, they'll wonder why their customers don't like a product or why their men and women don't understand their new strategy.
We can all learn a few things from A. G. Lafley, the CEO ofProcter & Gamble ( PG - news - people ). There's nothing flashy about him as a leader, but he's led a remarkable turnaround at P&G during his nearly 10 years at the top. He's done it by relentlessly communicating his core message: "The consumer is boss."
Lafley holds meeting regularly with buyers of P&G products. That's one of his top priorities. He'll visit them in their homes and join them for shopping trips to get their feedback, and he does so all over the world. He lavishes the same attention on his employees, meeting them in their offices, listening to their ideas and thanking them for their service. We're wise to imitate him.
A third key element of successful leadership involves judgment. In the end, your judgment calls, which are rooted in your character, become your legacy. Without the right values, judgment can easily be trumped by perverse incentives that encourage poor ethical choices.
Noel Tichy and Warren Bennis covered this topic well in their excellent book Judgment: How Winning Leaders Make Great Calls. Not every single judgment call you make needs to be correct. But you need to make the right calls consistently on the big choices involving strategy and talent.
Good strategy judgment frequently means a leader must find a new path when his organization is heading in the wrong direction. How well you can do this depends on your ability to scan the horizon and ask the right questions. But unless you have the right people on board, you can't execute your strategy. You need to get the right talent, and you need to ensure that it's positioned appropriately throughout your organization--and this is a constantly evolving process. The skill sets you need and the places in your organization where your men and women best fit will change as your environment and competition shift and new opportunities arise.
Ann Mulcahy became CEO of Xerox ( XRX - news - people ) when it was on the verge of bankruptcy. She led a phenomenal recovery by exercising great judgment. As Bill George recounts in True North: Discover Your Authentic Leadership, Mulcahy's first move was to meet with the top 100 executives at Xerox and ask them to stay and fight for the company's future. All but two of them did.
She also got out into the field to meet her employees and scout talent. She surrounded herself with good people and made sure they knew she needed them. She looked into the future and saw brighter days ahead for Xerox, even when key advisers were urging her to consider bankruptcy.
In her view, that future depended on re-engaging with customers through a strong sales team, launching innovative products by investing in research and development and reinventing the company's approach to its operating expenses. That strategy, developed in cooperation with her colleagues, rallied the entire organization. It provides a fine model for us as well.
I look forward to exploring these three themes--vision, communication and judgment--in greater depth in quarterly columns for Forbes over the next year. In the months in between those columns, you'll hear from my faculty colleagues at the Center for Creative Leadership on other key leadership skills for these turbulent times. We look forward to this opportunity to share our thoughts on leadership, and to hearing yours as well.

Wrongful executions
Blackstone ratio
In criminal law, Blackstone's formulation (also known as Blackstone's ratio or the Blackstone ratio) is the principle: "better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"
David Spence Texas Conviction: 1984, Executed: 1997
Spence was charged with murdering three teenagers in 1982. He was allegedly hired by a convenience store owner to kill another girl, and killed these victims by mistake. The convenience store owner, Muneer Deeb, was originally convicted and sentenced to death, but then was acquitted at a re-trial. The police lieutenant who supervised the investigation of Spence, Marvin Horton, later concluded: "I do not think David Spence committed this crime." Ramon Salinas, the homicide detective who actually conducted the investigation, said: "My opinion is that David Spence was innocent. Nothing from the investigation ever led us to any evidence that he was involved." No physical evidence connected Spence to the crime. The case against Spence was pursued by a zealous narcotics cop who relied on testimony of prison inmates who were granted favors in return for testimony. David Spence was executed in connection with the rape and torture murders of two 17-year-old girls and the murder of an 18-year-old boy in Waco. He received death sentences in two trials for the murders.
Mr. Spence, a roofer with a history of substance abuse, was accused of a murder-for-hire killing that went awry, in which the three victims died. Muneer Deeb, a convenience store owner, was also charged and sentenced to death in the case. But he received a new trial and was acquitted in 1993. Mr. Deeb died last November of liver cancer. He had steadfastly maintained that neither he nor Mr. Spence had anything to do with the killings.
The original police homicide investigator, Ramon Salinas, acknowledged in the appeals process that he had serious doubts about Mr. Spence's guilt. In a sworn deposition given to Mr. Spence's lawyers in 1993, Marvin Horton, a former Waco police lieutenant who was involved in the case, said, "I do not think David Spence committed this offense."
The prosecution built its case against Mr. Spence around bite marks -- a state expert said that bite marks on the body of one of the girls matched Mr. Spence's teeth -- and jailhouse snitches, both of which can be highly unreliable forms of evidence. Mr. Spence was already in prison, serving a 90-year sentence for aggravated sexual abuse of an 18-year-old man, when he was indicted for the Waco killings.
Two of the six jailhouse witnesses who testified at trial subsequently recanted, saying they had been given cigarettes, television privileges and alcohol, and one of them had been allowed conjugal visits with a girlfriend, in exchange for their accusations against Mr. Spence.
Mr. Spence's post-conviction lawyers from the now-closed Texas Resource Center organized a blind panel study in which five experts -- odontologists -- said the bite marks could not be matched to Mr. Spence's teeth.
Mr. Sutton, the governor's criminal justice adviser, said the verdict was fair and the death penalty was justified.
With Governor Bush running for president, and the Texas death penalty system under heavier scrutiny, one of Mr. Spence's post-conviction lawyers, Raoul Schonemann, says ruefully that Mr. Spence is receiving more attention now than he did when his lawyers were fighting to save his life.
"David certainly wanted us to persist in trying to bring out the truth," Mr. Schonemann said. "I've always been willing to answer questions. But I feel very conflicted. It's competing with my time for our people who are
In 1982, David Spence was accused of the rape and murder of two 17-year-old girls and one 18-year-old boy in Waco, Texas. He received the death penalty in two trials for the murders. Muneer Deeb, a convenience store owner, hired Spence to do the murders and he was also charged and sentenced to death. He received a new trial in 1993 and was later acquitted.
The prosecution built its case against Spence around bite marks that a state expert said matched Spence’s teeth and jailhouse snitches. Two of the six jailhouse witnesses who testified at trial later recanted, saying they were given cigarettes, television and alcohol privileges, and conjugal visits for their testimonies. Spence’s post-conviction lawyers had a blind panel study in which five experts said the bite marks could not be matched to Spence’s. Even the original homicide investigator on the case said he had serious doubts about Spence’s guilt and a former Waco police detective involved in the case said he did not think Spence committed the crime. David Spence was executed by lethal injection on April 14, 1997.
..[D]eath by execution is excessively expensive. Most people who support the death penalty believe it is more cost effective than life in prison. Perhaps at one time, when executions were swift and sure, this may have been the case. It is not now. Most people knowledgeable about the subject will agree that the delay now built into the system, more trial preparation, much longer time to get to trial, much longer jury selections and trials, much more complicated and far more frequent appeals, and continuous motions, have increased the cost of capital punishment so that it is now many times the cost of keeping a prisoner in prison for life."
"The death penalty is the most expensive part of the system on a per-offender basis. Millions are spent to achieve a single death sentence that, even if imposed, is unlikely to be carried out. Thus money that the police desperately need for more effective law enforcement may be wasted on the death penalty… The principal reason why the death penalty is so expensive can be summed up in one phrase: ‘death is different…' Every stage of a capital case is more time-consuming and expensive than in a typical criminal case. Jury selection takes much longer; more mental health and forensic experts will be needed; two trials will be required - one for guilt and one for sentencing; and the appeals will be far more complex, focusing on both the conviction and the death sentence. Two attorneys are usually appointed for the defense, so that issues of guilt and sentencing can be separately explored. The prosecution has to respond with equal or greater resources since they have the burden of proof...There is no reason the death penalty should be immune from reconsideration, along with other wasteful, expensive programs that no longer make sense." Fourteen studies have estimated the costs of capital punishment, including one study of the federal death penalty and 13 state- or county-level studies. Each study concludes that the presence of capital punishment results in additional costs. However, there is substantial variation in the cost estimates. Among the five studies that compare the cost of a death sentence with the cost of a capital-eligible case in which no death notice is filed, the average (additional) cost per case is $650,000, but the estimates range from about $100,000 to more than $1.7 million…

Cases receiving a death notice are approximately $517,000 more costly during the trial phase, $147,000 more costly during the penalty phase, and $201,000 more costly during the appellate phase than a capital eligible case where no death notice was filed…. On average, a death notice adds about $1,000,000 in costs over the duration of a case."
A study released by the Urban Institute on March 6, 2008 forecast that the lifetime cost to taxpayers for the capitally-prosecuted cases in Maryland since 1978 will be $186 million. That translates to $37.2 million for each of the state’s five executions since the state reenacted the death penalty. The study estimates that the average cost to Maryland taxpayers for reaching a single death sentence is $3 million - $1.9 million more than the cost of a non-death penalty case. (This includes investigation, trial, appeals, and incarceration costs.) The study examined 162 capital cases that were prosecuted between 1978 and 1999 and found that those cases will cost $186 million more than what those cases would have cost had the death penalty not existed as a punishment. At every phase of a case, according to the study, capital murder cases cost more than non-capital murder cases.

First of all, the death penalty diminishes the humanity of everyone it touches. As Sojourner Truth told the Michigan legislature during one debate on whether to reinstate capital punishment, “We are the makers of murderers if we do it.” This core human rights document, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, put it simply: Life is a human right. This makes the death penalty our deepest human rights abuse. As long as governments have the right to extinguish our lives, they maintain the power to deny us access to every other right.