-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Quite a few of the exemplary leaders or rather the founders of good/ethical companies had some sort of religious background or affiliation. Even Phil Powell, who my group interviewed for the exemplary leader project, mentioned his Christian values. I don’t think that being a person of faith, any faith, is necessary to be a good leader, though one could mistakenly make that corralative assumption. The key seems to be being a person of values and consistent and good morals. Generally this is associated with religious people but does not have to be. As I have mentioned before, good leaders must lead themselves. Leading yourself requires self-awareness and discipline; self-awareness and discipline are associated with a moral framework and ethical personal fabric. That point may seem obvious but it is not – it would be niave and foolish to walk away from this course thinking that good leaders need to be religious. What a person should walk away from this course understanding is that it is necessary to have a firm and deep moral framework for yourself. There is a recurrent theme here: you can’t lead if you don’t know the path and the path is drawn in part by who you are and what you believe.
The group projects were very effective and I deeply enjoyed seeing everyone’s presentations about the ethical companies. The exemplary leader paper was fun too because it provided us a chance to be in charge of gathering information about a leader we admire and developing that information into a profile of the leader. The assignments were good. Dislikes…that is hard to say. We did a lot of video case-studies but it may be nice to have a few more supplemental articles or case studies on companies or leaders who are doing the job right. Overall, as you can see from some of my blogs and you will read in my final leadership paper, I have truly learned from this class and adjusted my way of thinking about leaders and leadership. For that reason, I have little to offer by way of suggestions for change; as far as I’m concerned it worked.
Most importantly in this course I have l when I learned to refine my notion of leadership. Initially when I approached this class I was under the mistaken impression that a leader led people. What I have learned is that any jerk can lead people. The essential question for a Kelley to ask is for how long and to what ends does the person lead others? Effective leaders, lasting leaders and good leaders lead others through the methods and ideas we’ve learned here. The result is enduring companies, visions and creations that survive the leader. Also, the result is confident, happy and effective employees who are capable and prepared to continue without the leader and sustaining the creation or are capable of moving on to other things but are better for it. Effective leaders make great teams and good enterprises.
Not discussed in a leadership course is the nature of a good follower. We have talked at some legnth about getting the right people on the bus but I’d like to suggest that first, before one can be a good leader, one must be a good follower and be the right person on someone else’s bus. If anything, this class has shown that good leadership is a joint effort between the leader and the team. The leader is responsible for building the best team, setting the goals, providing the direction and framework and then helping move the group forward. The team is reponsible for taking direction, moving forward with the goals and vision and doing the work essentially. In order to be a great leader though I believe that one must know what it is like to be led, to know what it is like to take direction, follow somneone else’s vision, manage challenge, defeat, dissention, success, pride and resolution. The “trenches” are different from the leadership roll and it is crucial to understand the trenches before you lead the team. It will make your job so much easier if you can.
A good follower takes direction, is confident enough in her work to offer suggestions when appropriate and is not insecure. Insecurity can lead to rejection of direction and hurt feelings when the team makes a decisons against one of her ideas. The traits of a good follower are similar to those for a good leader; humility, dedication, good ethics, goal orieneted nature, self-awareness. The difference between a good leader and a good follower is the role on the team, not much else.
“The 48 Laws of Power” by Robert Greene and Joost Elffers is a book about just that – acquiring power. An example of the laws are #7 “Get others to do the work for you but always take the credit” and law #17 “Keep others in suspended terror: create an air of unpredictability.” The book uses examples from history (both recent and ancient) to illustrate its principles of appealling to the most basic of human emotions such as fear, ego, greed, jealousy, desire, narcissism and hubris. The men and women in this book were all “leaders” who illustrated these darker principles of life. I will admit that I have not read all of the book, only about 1/2 – which was enough. The principles extolled are a road map to manipulation and achievement of goals; however the method of achievement is anti-thetical to the principles of this course. The men in the book are well known; many are military conquerers such as Sun Tzu, Alexander the Great, and Napoleon as well as everyday men such as P.T. Barnum, founder of Barnum and Bailey’s Circus. Each of them did lead, but at what cost? Few if any of their empires or creations survived them; certainly those of military victory were often over-thrown themselves not long after their own bloody rise to power.
The point is not whether these men led or not, Ghengis Khan led, but was he an effective leader? That all depends on you definition of leadership which is even more dependent on your core beliefs about life in general. If the ends justify the means, in a Machiavellian sort of world view, then the definition of leadership is to get others to follow you. Under that theory, torture, fear, manipulation, bribery and demand are valid leadership skills. If however, you do not subscribe to Machiavelli’s notion, and instead ascribe to a more enlightened idea that the journey of life is as much if not more important that the destination, then the theory of leadership which involves humility, honesty, integrity, self-discipline and sacrifice are the guiding traits. “The 48 Laws of Power” book is one valid way to manipulate others and seize control; but at what cost? I would not want to be the sort of person who lived that life nor who was remembered that way. My colleagues, co-workers and friends deserve more than that. I am glad I only burned enough time to read 1/2 the book so I would know what it was about – the other 1/2 was unneccesary.
One of the guests recently on the Colbert Report commented, “The mystery of leadership is that people feel better just having this guy in charge.” She was discussing a letter written to FDR during the New Deal times; the letter was from a man who had lost everything during the stock market crash/Great Depression who told the President about his situation but felt that the President was doing the right thing even though his situation was not getting better personally. The notion that a person will have faith in a leader during dire times and will continue to follow that leader has played out in many situations in history; a perfect example is any solider who stood with his general at the surrender at Appomattox, those who stood behind Nixon during Watergate, Eva Brown and all of the German SS officers who stood behind Hitler and the Third Reich even as the Allied Forces advanced. Each of these moments were painful and lost but people followed their leaders – why? Because they believed in something greater than themselves; they believed in a cause or a vision and the leader embodied that vision.
A true leader has to understand that s/he is not just the sum of his/her own parts but can also be the embodiment of a set of ideals and vision; the vision and ideals of the company or cause the group is working toward. It seems strange and seems to be a lot of responsibility but it is true: the leader becomes the embodiment of this greater idea. This can be a daunting reality and the great leaders we read about were generally modest and humble, completely unaware of their great weight and authority. That is part of the mystery and majesty, their utter and complete dedication to the cause and the ideals which they are embodying. It is good, it is humbling to think as a leader there is so much responsibility but it is true. THe key to being a good leader is to realilze that actions are watched, demeanor is noted, personal goals and values are observed at every turn so it is critical to tend to one’s behavior and personal ideals and goals while leading.
Jdmbagirl's Blog 