Ugh. I both love and hate questions like this. I could go on for hours about it, but surely there's no final all-encompassing truth to this? Just when you think you have a hold on some kind of shadow of an answer, someone comes along and says something that makes you shift your stance a little more and more and more until you're either confused or just don't care anymore. Then again, I suppose any aspiring 'leader' should know something about 'leading'.
Wikipedia says (via Chemers, 1997) that leadership is “a process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task." Right. Let's go home.
However, one factor about leadership that always creeps into my mind when this sort of discussion arises is the differentiation between it and management. People cross their wires on this all the time, perhaps understandably. "Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things" (a classic Peter Drucker line, there). Where management is about breaking down an idea or problem into logical or 'manageable' components, leadership goes the opposite way; to bring these different components together towards a common task or... wait for it... Vision.
I've always liked that word, even more so now after recently completing Tom Rath's StrengthsFinder 2.0, an online tool which allows you to identify your natural strengths, find ways to refine them further and incorporate them into what you do everyday. A load of pretentious tripe, most likely.
Of course, I've lapped up everything it's told me. It seems my single greatest strength is being Futuristic - "... inspired by the future and what could be. They inspire others with their visions of the future". I would agree with this assessment, too. While this revelation certainly strokes my ego there's no doubt that, first and foremost, a leader in any capacity has to know why they want to go somewhere (not just how) and be able to articulate it. That is what gives purpose to people - managers, employees, subordinates, citizens, whoever.
Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" speech delivered to a massive audience on the steps of Washington in 1963 would certainly be a contender for visionary moment of the 20th century. In it, he captures precisely what the civil rights movement in America was all about at this time. It certainly inspires, even across time and generations. But it's more than a speech that makes leadership - it's the encapsulation of an idea (and the ability to articulate it and mobilize resources around it) that made MLK a worthy and effective leader of the civil rights movement.
The March for Jobs and Freedom on Washington during that time, and especially King's speech, helped put civil rights at the very top of the liberal political agenda in the United States and facilitated passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It was a circuit breaker. It summed up all the ills, the hates, the wrongs of racial segregation in America but went further than that - it gave people a clear sense of what could and should be. Policy makers and citizens alike could visualize what the fight for racial equality was for, what all the pain and effort was for. It allowed them to all move in the right direction, together.
Before anything else happens, leadership (whether performed individually or through consensus) must establish and articulate a vision/mission/goal for others to pursue. Management, strategy, execution - these things can only proceed, not precede.
Wikipedia says (via Chemers, 1997) that leadership is “a process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task." Right. Let's go home.
However, one factor about leadership that always creeps into my mind when this sort of discussion arises is the differentiation between it and management. People cross their wires on this all the time, perhaps understandably. "Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things" (a classic Peter Drucker line, there). Where management is about breaking down an idea or problem into logical or 'manageable' components, leadership goes the opposite way; to bring these different components together towards a common task or... wait for it... Vision.
I've always liked that word, even more so now after recently completing Tom Rath's StrengthsFinder 2.0, an online tool which allows you to identify your natural strengths, find ways to refine them further and incorporate them into what you do everyday. A load of pretentious tripe, most likely.
Of course, I've lapped up everything it's told me. It seems my single greatest strength is being Futuristic - "... inspired by the future and what could be. They inspire others with their visions of the future". I would agree with this assessment, too. While this revelation certainly strokes my ego there's no doubt that, first and foremost, a leader in any capacity has to know why they want to go somewhere (not just how) and be able to articulate it. That is what gives purpose to people - managers, employees, subordinates, citizens, whoever.
Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" speech delivered to a massive audience on the steps of Washington in 1963 would certainly be a contender for visionary moment of the 20th century. In it, he captures precisely what the civil rights movement in America was all about at this time. It certainly inspires, even across time and generations. But it's more than a speech that makes leadership - it's the encapsulation of an idea (and the ability to articulate it and mobilize resources around it) that made MLK a worthy and effective leader of the civil rights movement.
The March for Jobs and Freedom on Washington during that time, and especially King's speech, helped put civil rights at the very top of the liberal political agenda in the United States and facilitated passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It was a circuit breaker. It summed up all the ills, the hates, the wrongs of racial segregation in America but went further than that - it gave people a clear sense of what could and should be. Policy makers and citizens alike could visualize what the fight for racial equality was for, what all the pain and effort was for. It allowed them to all move in the right direction, together.
Before anything else happens, leadership (whether performed individually or through consensus) must establish and articulate a vision/mission/goal for others to pursue. Management, strategy, execution - these things can only proceed, not precede.
Liked your candid posting on leadership. Methink everyone is born a leader, and when the timing is right, the leader will step up and rule! (or guide; or lead; or influence; or inspire)... a matter of timing...
ReplyDelete