Not that long ago I was attending a meeting with a large number of people. It was one of those motivational type meetings – no real goals, just trying to get people to think differently. I’m never really a fan of these things anyway. I don’t believe that people are introspective enough to take much away from these events. Even if they understand what’s being said in the meeting, I don’t see them going home to figure out how to actually act differently.
Finally, as we got to the end of this meeting, the facilitator asked to the audience “what does being a leader mean?” It was sort of a wrap up question. People said things like “listens to people”, “stands up for what they know is right”, “models the behaviors,” and so on. And after a bit of this nonsense, the faciliatator asks “what do you all think of these things?”
I raised my hand. I said (more or less) “these are platitudes. We all know these are good things, but I don’t and I’m guessing no one else, knows how to do these things.” Essentially, we get what ought to be done, but it’s like emotional intelligence. Even if you know what the right answers are, you don’t necessarily act that way in a real life situation.
This is why leadership has so many books written about it. This is why leaders are so revered. If we all knew how to do this, if we could all attend a seminar and really become leaders then leadership wouldn’t be anything special. The reality is, we don’t know how to train for leadership. We barely know how to select for it. We seem to know leadership when we see it, but we can’t articulate what about a person makes them one. It’s a certain je ne sais quoi.
But it also poses a problem. If we can’t adequately train it and can hardly select for it, what should we do about it? Do we just accept our fate? Perhaps not. Perhaps instead of trying to make everyone into leaders we shouldn’t try at all. Some will naturally emerge and that’s probably good enough. For everyone else, what’s so wrong with being a high quality follower? What’s so bad about just being good at doing your job well? Why does everyone need to lead anyway? If everyone did, who is going to follow? You can’t lead if there’s nobody to lead anyway.
Mint
April 22, 2010
I definately think leaders are traditionally born, not made. I think the books about leadership are there to make them better at the skill they already have. It seems that most folks trade within a range of their genetic skill.
In general it just seems that some people are shepards, and some are lambs.
How is a leader defined? I define a leader at a high level as someone willing to make a decision and to advocate for it. Someone who is comfortable with their own judgement enough to convince others of it.
Interestingly enough, most leaders I have met have been sharp/intelligent, but that doesn’t mean they have all been wise. Leaders can lead you alot of places, some good and some bad…
ProcessRants
April 22, 2010
An excellent point! We tend to ascribe benevolent qualities to leaders, but Jonestown pops to mind as an example of a leader that took a whole lot of people nowhere good.
The other thing that struck me about your comment “some people are shepards, and some are lambs” is that although there is nothing inherently wrong with being a lamb, we associate that role as inferior for some reason. Now, maybe in sheep herding you really don’t want to be the lamb (and ultimately someone’s dinner), but the collective power of a group of intelligent, dilligent followers is great to make visions into realities. We sadly seem to devalue that when we talk about leadership. How come there are no seminars on being a great follower?