Leadership: Is It About Them or Me?

This is the third in a series in conjunction with John W. McKenna's leadership challenge.

Leadership, Choices, and Implications produced heartfelt comments  that show just how personally leader effectiveness is perceived and experienced.

The leader described drew reactions ranging from "he's clearly not a leader" to (my paraphrase) "He could have been better, but he was a good leader".

I Know What I Want And I'm Right

Why the bi-polar responses to the same leadership story?

Because each of us has an idea of what is "right". And what's right bubbles up from the inner depths of how we think things should be. That can be very useful, since it creates a gap that shows where there might be potential for improvement.

But it can also cause an overpowering idealism that clouds or ignores the many realities of a situation. If the idealistic power is so great, one's ability to see clearly can become vastly distorted. If so, the willingness to understand, empathize, and forgive is often replaced with selfishness and callous judgmentalism.

Business leadership is especially prone to this phenomenon. While millions are reading and writing about the way things could be and should be, those in leadership roles still have to "do it." And they have to do it while finding some way to at least minimally satisfy the myriad and idiosyncratic needs of shareholders, boards of directors, regulatory agencies, managers, and employees. At the same time, they have families to care for complete with PTA meetings, ball games, health issues, and the inevitable deaths of loved ones.

Try This

So here is my suggestion for a healthier view of leadership and a way to bring additional peace into your own working life:

Start humanizing leaders using the same lens of reality and forgiveness with which you view your own humanity.

At the same time, stop demonizing them by making them actors whose "role" is defined in light of the ideal that exists only between the covers of popular books.

The books are about potential. So are people.

What's Ahead?

We'll look at the impact of the leadership "movement", whether or not the leader-follower label is a dichotomy or a relationship, and then, to honor John's endeavor , a peek into the "suckiness" factor.

A word of thanks to Alex the Chief Happiness Officer , the always-brainy Dr. Robyn McMaster , real-life executive Dean Fuhrmann, thought leader Peter Vajda, and the coach who will accelerate your momentum, Joan Schramm, for the thoughtful comments that added to this post. And to Galba Bright: the followers will follow shortly.

If you enjoyed this post, I invite you to continue with:

• You, Your Boss, and Your Organization

• Work Satisfaction: Is Your Heart At Peace?

• Forgiveness Is Good Business

Comments

[Charlie]

True. We don't have to be quick at judging people. Mistakes are part of our development and if we give them a chance to learn, maybe they will change their style.

[Steve Roesler]

Hi, Charlie,

You are so right. The thing about any aspect of life is that we learn by trying things, see what goes right as well as what goes wrong, and then (hopefully) learn and make adjustments accordingly. There's also a time line involved. Everyone learns differently. And depending upon the difficulty and depth of the situation, a number of trial-and-error iterations may need to occur before we "get it".

Thanks for weighing in...

[Howie]

Nice post. I agree that each individual has a different approach in learning and it wouldn't be fair if we compare them with others.

[Steve Roesler]

Thanks for stopping by, Howie.

Learning really is a unique quest, eh?

[Jim Stroup]

You're right, of course, that we shouldn't demonize CEOs who fail to equal whatever peculiar standards we may have set for them, for whatever our own peculiar reasons may be for setting them. And as for the figure you so brilliantly sketched for us in the previous post, among the many things that can be said for him is one of my favorite: whatever view he may have had of his own unique ability to contribute, he was about the work, and contributing to its accomplishment - so, in his case, it seems to have been about the work, rather more than "them or me." As you painted him, his opinion of himself appeared to reflect less self-absorption than personal dedication.

But back to today's topic: Okay, we shouldn't demonize them. But neither should we make excuses for them because they have to bear such great burdens and still strive to be human beings. The burdens they bear can be managed. What many such burdens can't be is led by single individuals. Not for long. Something will break, and it's usually not the burden.

So, top managers can lighten their burden by removing the mantle of leadership from it, and return to managing their organizations, including all the brilliant people in them eager to be - not about "me or them" or "leaders" or "followers" - but about the work at hand.