What's wrong with 'leader' and leadership
by Miki SaxonI really dislike words that have no definition other than a different form of themselves.
Leader – a person or thing that leads.
Leadership – the position or function of a leader
Talk about something with no real meaning—except when looking at the man-hours spent teaching and writing about it or the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on acquiring it.
And I find the practice of identifying ‘leaders’ early in their careers particularly repugnant for two reasons.
1. The idea that you can identify future ‘leaders’ from their actions on the playground or in high school or during their initial working years is inaccurate at best and stupid at worst.
Those identified as kids are the ones who excel at getting noticed, love the spotlight, have a good story to tell and are typically attractive and mainstream. The nerds and misfits are rarely noticed as future ‘leaders’—think Steve Jobs.
Picking them out for special training during their first five years of work eliminates all those who work for bad bosses or for companies where entry level hires are grunts with no real responsibility.
Choosing them because they have an MBA is really ridiculous—all the degree proves is that they could afford grad school (either had the money or went into debt) and that they made it through. That’s it.
Further, the ‘early leader’ approach eliminates all those late bloomers giving them far less opportunities to excel.
The second reason is much worse.
2.Those ‘chosen’ start getting extra attention and mentoring from day one of being identified, so the traits that got them noticed get stronger. Stronger isn’t always better.
They are anointed, singled out for greatness, they are special.
Being special sets you apart; suddenly you’re better than the others and that means that there must be different rules for you because you’re special, better—and entitled. An attitude best summed up by Richard Nixon when he said, “When the President does it, that means that it is not illegal.”
And that sense of being anointed a ‘leader’ is partly responsible for the current debacle.
Your comments—priceless
October 24th, 2008 at 9:45 am
[…] please stop over for Miki Saxon’s insightful observations about the dangers of developing “leaders” on the basis of their identification as such […]
October 24th, 2008 at 10:07 am
Thanks for the interesting post.
First, the title provides enough food for thought to keeping the Internet humming for some time.
Regarding the words themselves, it might be best if “leader” refers to a person and “leadership” refers to action. Personally, I try to avoid the label “leader” as much as possible because it can be so temporary and fleeting that it undermines what it is attempting to describe. (Think Enron or Spitzer, etc.) Of course, some times we just can’t avoid (or resist) using it though.
“Leadership” can be exercised by anyone at anytime as it’s a term defined by it’s context. It can be Presidential or janitorial and like any other skill, I believe that it can be identified at various points in a person’s life. That doesn’t mean that person will ultimately assume a role in which they exercise leadership or that their abilities will increase, diminish or disappear over time but it does provide a starting point for creating opportunities to strengthen leadership skills.
“Leadership” is hard, if not impossible, to concisely define. To paraphrase Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart:
“I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it“
Justice Stewart could have easily been talking about leadership.
The amazing thing about leadership is that it manifests itself in so many diverse and fascinating ways and that it’s power lies in the eyes of the followers. Some think McCain others think Obama. Some think Jobs others think Gates. It’s simply a complex subject. ;-)
Your closing statement reminds me that we often look to our “leaders” to solve our problems and blame them when they don’t. We live in a complicated, interconnected world with too many adaptive challenges that probably won’t be solved until more of us exercise leadership in our own spheres of influence.
Always intrigued by the perspectives presented here. Thanks for starting the conversation. Keep up the good work.
October 26th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Hi Peter, I’m glad you enjoyed it and thanks for taking time to add to the conversation.
I totally agree with the ‘any time, any place concept of leadership that I heard described as “leader in the instance.” I’ve always believed that it’s the court of public opinion after the fact that really decides if someone led or not.
Given my quirky sense of humor, I also find it amusing that the term carries the assumption that by definition a leader embodies all positive traits and is on the side of the angels (based on personal, subjective definition, of course. ;-) But as I said today, I sincerely believe that the most defining leadership comment is found in Peter Druker’s statement, “Leadership is all hype. We’ve had three great leaders in this century – Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.”
November 3rd, 2008 at 5:11 am
[…] aren’t scam artists, but sincere, intelligent, educated people who truly believe that by choosing certain people and teaching them ‘leadership skills’ they can create a kind of super person with […]
November 10th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
The article provides some interesting perspectives on words that are often used as labels in the work force such as ‘leader’ and ‘leadership.’ Where I agree that some people may get caught up in the word for its mere resonance and meaning in society, leadership means a great deal of things to different people. Characteristics that one may look for in a leader include: 1) Showing initiative, 2) Being a good communicator, listener, and observer, 3) Being honest, reliable, and trustworthy, 4) Being accountable, and taking responsibility for your actions, 5) Being able to admit when you’re wrong, 6) Being able to grow, and learn from criticism, 7) Sometimes sacrificing your personal objectives for the sake of the greater cause, 8) Not being afraid to fail, as failure is sometimes the best of lessons, 9) Leaving your office or position in a better condition compared to when you first arrived, 10) Encouraging team members to interact, and provide insight into projects, and 11) Being able to help and support others. Alvira Khan, Florida Atlantic University, FAU Boca Raton Alumna, http://www.alvirakhan.com
November 10th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Hi Alvira, thanks for stopping by and taking time to comment.
The characteristics you mention are excellent, but aren’t necessarily found in so-called ‘leaders’—Peter Drucker said, “Leadership is all hype. We’ve had three great leaders in this century – Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.”—and are often found in ‘non-leaders’—they are just excellent traits for anyone to possess.
It would be better if people just cultivated them and stopped looking around wondering if they were a leader yet.
November 10th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
[…] Additional Information […]