There is no shortage of debate surrounding leadership when it comes to philosophy, style, definitional distinctions, nuances, complex theory, etc. That said, I believe most reasonable people would agree leadership is nothing if not personal. Leadership can represent a pursuit, discipline, practice, passion, calling, skill, competency, obligation, duty, compulsion, or even an obsession. I’ve known those who have worshiped at the alter of leadership as a religion, and a bit of reflection will reveal more than a few leadership revolutions dotting the historical timeline. My goal with today’s post is to challenge your thinking and your perceptions with regard to the state of leadership. So, my question is this – what’s next for leadership?
Think about this for a moment – with all our experience and all the research, with all the resources and all the focus on leadership, do you find it perplexing, if not altogether disturbing, that our world has never been more lacking for true leaders? Casual observation might lead you to conclude leadership has devolved rather than evolved. If you pay close attention to the media and world events, it would appear those serving themselves greatly outnumber those who place service above self. Here’s the thing – we’ll never all agree on what leadership is, or is not, but I think most reasonable people will concur it’s time for a change.
Why does all this matter? Because leadership matters…Whether through malice or naivete, those who abuse or tolerate the abuse of leadership place us all at risk…Poor leadership cripples businesses, ruins economies, destroys families, loses wars, and can bring the demise of nations. The demand for true leaders has never been greater – when society misunderstands the importance of leadership, and when the world inappropriately labels non-leaders as leaders we are all worse for the wear.
It’s time for less talk and more action. Leadership is not about the power and the accolades bestowed upon the leader, it’s about the betterment of those whom the leader serves. At its essence, leadership is about people. At its core, leadership is about improving the status quo, inspiring positive change, and challenging conventional thinking. As long as positional and philosophical arguments are more important than forward progress, as long as being right is esteemed above being vulnerable and open to new thought, as long as ego is elevated above empathy and compassion, as long as rhetoric holds more value than performance, and as long as we tolerate these things as acceptable behavior we will all suffer at the hands of poor leadership.
So, back to my original question – what’s next for leadership? I submit it’s time for a leadership movement that values engagement, open dialog, and candid discourse above personal gain. A movement is a cause greater than one’s self – it’s a populist groundswell rather than an elitist academic exercise. A movement is intentional, impassioned and biased toward action. A movement requires a vision that’s inclusive, collaborative, and has an orientation toward service. Most of all, a movement requires people committed to change.
So, where do we start? My belief is that we start by sluaghtering as many sacred cows as we can find. We dispense with the trivial, and we begin majoring in the majors. We bring the best leadership minds together – I’m not talking about like-minded thinkers, but big thinkers open to challenging what is considered “normal” with the goal of shattering outdated thinking. We dialog and debate, but most of all we listen, learn and act. We focus on what’s wrong with leadership and we fix it. This is where we start:
- I’m calling for those willing to participate to share what they feel is wrong with leadership in the comment section below. Share with us your insights on flawed principles, practice, theory, doctrine or logic. Be candid – be clear – be bold.
- I’ll select from the topics put forth in the comments below and create an agenda for a few live public debates that pierce at the heart of status quo with the hope of creating thought provoking discourse that leads to positive change.
If we get enough traction on meaningful topics we might just create a movement…Now’s your chance to express what you’ve been thinking in a venue that could make a difference – you in?
Koen Marichal
April 6, 2011 at 6:41 amHi Mike. I share your observations: so much talk about leadership & so little real change. I stepped out of HR 6 months ago because I found that HR did no longer have any answers to the permanent-in-crisis-organisation I worked in. Since then I dedicate myself to connecting-reflecting-developing newnormal leadership in order to improve the leadership in my country (that is Flanders, Dutch speaking part of Belgium). Newnormal leadership is personal, shared, transformational & for the greater good. I strongly believe that through the topic of leadership people can awaken and feel better in the new emergent world order. This is certainly the case in the developed, western societies. Other societies struggle for their survival and have no message at all for this higher ideals. I’m happy to find inspiration and support through the social media all around the world.
Mike Myatt
April 6, 2011 at 6:58 amHi Koen:
Thanks for sharing your story. It’s always inspirational to see someone step-out of their comfort zone and pursue their passion. Thanks again for sharing Koen.
Ron
April 6, 2011 at 9:38 amHi Mike,
I’m inclined to think that a ‘Centralist mindset’ is at the heart of what’s most wrong with leadership today. R.L. Dabney wrote: “By the necessary imperfection of human nature, an agency which is best adapted to one function must be worst adapted to others; and an association which should do everything, would be sure to do all in the worst possible manner.”
The assumptions of Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan permeate all government (i.e. leadership) thinking today. Family: daycare centers can do a better job of raising our children. Church: megachurches are best. State: global government will be far more efficient and benevolent than independent nations and states. Have I slaughtered a sacred cow?
Ron
Mike Myatt
April 6, 2011 at 1:35 pmHi Ron:
You have definitely hung some beef on the hook:). Your thoughts seem to be another variation of what Ron Edmondson shared with regard to the need for personal leadership. Your observations point out what is perhaps the root cause of the lack of personal leadership – the willingness of people to so willingly abdicate their responsibility to those who would so gladly exercise the ability to take it. A lack of personal accountability and responsibility has helped usher in a global leadership crisis. Thanks for sharing your thoughts Ron.
Ron Edmondson
April 6, 2011 at 12:03 pmThis is a great dialogue starter Mike. Thanks for “leading” here. I think one thing wrong with leadership is that we’ve mostly seen leadership as something reserved for those with a title or a position. The fact is, however, that leadership can occur at every level of society. It simply takes someone willing to face the risks, obstacles, fear and challenges and lead. As with David from the Bible, one in the crowd who decides to act rather than talk about it, can be a leader! We need more Davids.
Mike Myatt
April 6, 2011 at 1:24 pmHi Ron:
Agreed…leadership can occur anywhere, at anytime, and by anyone – all it takes is the personal willingness to act which you described in your comment. I agree that we need more Davids. We could also use more Daniels, Josephs, Ruths, etc. Great leader are those willing to do the right thing when the opportunity presents itself. Thanks for sharing Ron.
Mark Oakes
April 6, 2011 at 2:24 pmGreat question, Mike!
Dissatisfaction with leadership isn’t new. That has existed since the dawn of time. To think today is any different than yesterday, or centuries ago, doesn’t make sense. The only things that have changed are the names, context and a different set of contributing parameters.
The tendency is to lay blame and sensationalize the closest perceived problem (e.g. poor leadership). The problem we see, however, is rarely the real problem. Fixing surface problems doesn’t cure root causes. What then is the root cause? In the case of leadership we have to go back and understand where individuals are at the present moment. What are they facing? What are they thinking? What are their fears? What’s different today than 1,2,5,10,15+ years ago? We have to do this because the simple fact remains that leadership doesn’t exist without followership.
In short, what is the current context for the individual (follower)?
– Scared, disoriented, unable to see a positive future when current macroeconomic, political, social and personal financial conditions are in a constant state of flux
I’m not saying that leadership shouldn’t change. Quite the opposite. What I am saying, though, is that leadership must do the following
o Accurately see the future
o Fully understand the current (mental) state of followership
Changing Contexts of leadership
o Tsunami-style changes are upon us (hard trends) and these will continue to accelerate
o Followers focus on cycles (economic, etc) and believe that “If we just hold on long enough things will get better”. This is a flawed premise because things aren’t going to get better by simply cycling out of current conditions. This is because there are other, fundamental shifts (trends) that are changing the world as we know it. It’s leadership’s job to know/see this and chart the right course
o Brick/Mortar, legacy mindsets of leadership no longer adequate.
o Still view leadership from military perspectives and assume the goal is leading large organizations. Over time I believe this will be the exception versus the norm. We still teach leadership from this perspective. IMHO, It’s outdated
o Leading in a flat/virtual world
I see 3 alternate leadership approaches/styles. These are leading from…
Hindsight
o Legacy leadership training, styles and approaches
Insight
o “We need to get better!!” (e.g. TQM, Innovation and a whole plethora of things that benchmark competition). Problem with this approach is that it’s primarily reactive vs. proactive.
Foresight
o Spot where the world will be in 5 to 10 years, anticipate and accurately forecast a vision for a better, reliable future.
IMHO, It’s the latter which holds the key to changes in leadership. When we tie back to the context of the individual, we have the framework for creating executable visions that anticipate the future and create HOPE for followers.
It is this final point that is critical. People want something they can believe in. This is why they follow leaders. They want something that gives them meaning and Hope
-> Leadership Faith and Vision are the precursors of Meaning and Hope
M
Mike Myatt
April 6, 2011 at 2:40 pmLeadership as a movement to inspire meaning and hope – well that about sums-up what we’re currently lacking and what we are so desirous of.
What can I say, but that I’ve come to expect nothing less than insightful commentary from you. Even though the chinning bar is set high, you continue to rise above it. Thanks so much for the great insights Mark.
Dan Collins
April 6, 2011 at 2:27 pmMike,
I’m going to really go out on a limb and perhaps offend the sensibilities of the many leadership ‘experts’ a bit – but what the heck. Leadership is often placed into the categories of personality and best practices. With the take away being modify one and take actions to implement the other. I call bull#@@ on this consensus. Example is Leadership – Period. As you know I am an ardent admirer of Churchill and Gandhi. Two polar opposites in approach and personality. Their leadership was stringent, focused, uncompromising and inspiring. They set out ‘lines in the sand’ with their words and actions but most of all ‘by their example’. Mike – bottom line – there is too much fluff – too much ‘best practice crap’ and not enough example. Why in the hell are there no Churchill’s and Gandhi’s today? Because rather than setting an example themselves “leaders’ are trying to please all the people all the time. They are trying to follow ‘ best practices’ instead of leading. ‘Leaders’ are watching for polls, asking for permission and trying to please. I’m pretty sure I would not have liked Churchill much and I know I would have thought Gandhi was crazy to be as sacrificial and selfless as he was but I would have followed those men anywhere because of their strength, character, conviction and pure essence of leadership.
Mike Myatt
April 6, 2011 at 2:37 pmYour said: “Example is Leadership – Period.” Poignant and conclusive – enough said.
Thanks for your candor Dan.
James Strock
April 6, 2011 at 3:55 pmThis is a wonderful post and such a fine idea for going forward. Each of the comments your post has brought forth are also very fine.
One topic that I would offer is the immense change from industrial era to information age. We’re moving ever further from the industrial age assumptions on leadership, yet one big one may still be relatively unscathed: the notion that there is one set of best practices or an ideal type of leadership.
If we think about it from the outside-in, from outputs and results rather than inputs and motivations, there may be an infinite number of leadership approaches that are effective in various situations.
If so, what does that portend for how one inspires and learns and educates on leadership?
Mike Myatt
April 6, 2011 at 4:42 pmHi Jim:
Thanks for the thoughtful reasoning put forth in your comment. I have NEVER been a fan of one-size-fits-all leadership. Leadership must be applied contextually based on the specifics of a given need or situation. We also must get away from the herd mentality of best practices and begin to view everything through the eye of innovation built around next practices. While all of us should be a student of history, we must practice with a focus on the future. Real leadership is found in breaking new ground, not in attempting to harvest crops from ground that is no longer fertile. Thanks so much for your thoughts Jim.
Heinrich Mueller
April 6, 2011 at 5:12 pmLeadership must focus on peoples development. This is valid for an organization, a corporation and also for political leaders.
Having a vision which is clearly focussed on the wellbeing of All as a politician, the achievment of the organisations Vision or the corporates goal is essential and a leader must live it as a role model authentically. Empower, believe in and trust people is first.
Unfortunatly most of todays leaders are more concentrated to stay in power, build up their image and wealth which leads to decadence and corruption
Mike Myatt
April 6, 2011 at 6:45 pmHi Heinrich:
I tend to be in agreement with your thinking about the current status quo, as well as what it will take to make changes. Thanks for sharing Sir.
Wally Bock
April 6, 2011 at 6:40 pmNothing like a challenge, Mike. Thanks. Let me try to address your post by splitting the issue into parts.
How we got here.
For a bit more than twenty years we’ve shifted focus from the kind of work called leadership to a “special” kind of person we call a leader. That’s led us to exalt leaders above mere mortals and seek magical solutions instead of realistic ones. The only way this will change effectively is over a generation and then only if we do a reasonable job of changing the things it’s possible to change.
What we can change.
We do an abysmal job of selecting people for positions that require leadership. First-time leaders are usually selected by those above them based on their performance on another type of work. Very few new leaders receive adequate training or support, especially during the critical transition period, but really throughout most careers.
We can change the way we develop leaders. Most of the education of leaders is an academic exercise, that’s in appropriate for a kind of work best learned as an apprentice trade.
What’s changing around us.
The workplace is undergoing a sea change as we speak. We’re in the gap between two eras, trying to figure out what to shed, what to keep, and what to acquire for the world that’s out there somewhere in the mist.
Mike Myatt
April 6, 2011 at 6:49 pmHi Wally:
Thanks for the brilliant summation of where we’ve been, where we are today, and where must go to acquire the needed changes in our future leaders. I agree that most organizations do a horrible job of developing leaders. If adjustments aren’t made we’re likely to get exactly what we deserve – more of the same. Thanks for sharing Wally.
Shoes
April 6, 2011 at 7:07 pmMike: On the money and perfectly timed! My most commonly observed leadership “gaps” are:
Lack of vision
Incongruency between the personal values of the leader vs. that being exposed in the org.
Lack of commitment to personal growth by leadership.
Mike Myatt
April 6, 2011 at 7:45 pmHi John:
We’re in agreement that all three deficits you mentioned are prevalent and serious. While a lack of vision and value conflicts are certainly nothing to be trivialized, more commitment to development can help correct those deficits. I’m always amazed when leaders who don’t invest in themselves seem shocked when they have difficulty navigating challenges. What’s perhaps even more disingenuous is the leader not committed to development, who wonders why their team is faltering…Great thoughts John. Thanks for sharing.
Michael McKinney
April 6, 2011 at 7:16 pmMike:
This is a great topic. The problem with leadership—we know what we need to know about leadership—is leaders themselves (and often compounded by the people who follow them for the wrong reasons). It will always be an issue because we grow up placing the wrong emphasis on leadership. Most of us grow up thinking it means being in charge.
I don’t think there are any born leaders. No one is born thinking, “I want to serve.” We have to come to that understanding. Some get it better than others. (BTW James Strock’s Serve to Lead is one of the best on this issue.) We are all born with traits and abilities that can be used in the service of others, but they have to be developed and competencies have to be learned.
We find that problem leaders are ones that begin to experience the trappings of leadership but they have not developed the character to manage their role or themselves well. We don’t place enough emphasis on the inside work of leadership. And understandably so. It’s difficult and is a lifetime process. And too, much of that work should have been set in motion long before any of us gets out into the world. It’s is where leadership development should first be conducted.
Leadership will always be an issue as each generation steps up to the plate and brings with them their own peculiarities that have to be addressed and managed. None all good or bad, but all human.
Mike Myatt
April 6, 2011 at 7:37 pmHi Michael:
Thanks for the comment, and you and I are in complete agreement of Jim’s book – absolutely top notch. I particularly appreciate you pointing out what serves as the very bane of problematic leadership – human nature. I agree that leadership is more of a journey than a destination and that we must help develop the character of leaders so that they are well prepared to deal with the ebb and flow challenges and opportunities that come their way. Thanks for sharing such sound thinking Sir.
Tanveer Naseer
April 6, 2011 at 9:14 pmHi Mike,
What a great question and like everyone else, I applaud you for getting this movement started. After I read your question of what’s lacking in leadership today, the first thought that came to mind was the absence of creating meaningful purpose in today’s workplaces.
As Mark pointed out in his comment, leaders can’t simply wait out the storm anticipating better times are ahead because that’s the normal cycle of things. Instead, leaders need to frame their organization’s efforts within the context of these storms; of why their employees’ contributions remain relevant and pertinent beyond simply completing internal bureaucratic processes.
Leaders need to communicate to their teams how these changes/challenges are impacting their efforts and how they can either adapt, manage or workaround them so that a tangible value is offered. In so doing, leaders empower their employees to not sit on their hands waiting for better weather, but to meet current challenges head-on because their focus is not only on today, but where they want to be years from now.
For me, this is the reason why it’s easy to find leaders from the past to illustrate lessons on effective leadership. So many of them understood that they couldn’t simply exist in that moment, but that they had to figure out where they wanted their countries/organizations to be years from now. They also knew that they had to figure out a way to not only communicate that to those under their care, but doing so in a manner that makes this future vision meaningful and purpose-driven as well.
In today’s world, this means we have to move past organizational boundaries/silos and shift our focus away from defining leadership in terms of titles and roles. We need to return to a more simple vantage point of viewing our organizations as a group of people who, like the first agrarian societies, gathered together not simply to raise up a select few, but to raise up a viable community where everyone can benefit from the knowledge, skills, and contributions of each other. In this light, the purpose becomes less about the leader and more about how this purpose impacts those who contribute to helping achieve it.
Does that mean making leadership and business more personal? You betcha and the payoff for everyone will be well worth it.
Not sure if I slaughtered any sacred cows here, but if I did, I say we use it for a community barbeque to celebrate.
Mike Myatt
April 6, 2011 at 9:31 pmHi Tanveer:
Your comments are insightful and consistent with those of other contributors to this dialog. Meaning, purpose, focus on serving others, a greater good, etc. These are clearly the motivators that unite people in a movement. You are absolutely correct that leadership needs to become more personal, much more personal. Thanks for adding to the thought stream Tanveer.
P.S.
I love BBQ:)
Thomas McDaniels
April 7, 2011 at 12:01 amPoor leadership is more common than the exceptions. As we observe places of business we often see a lack of effective leadership. That is why we are prone to visit exceptional places when we go out for a special event. The difference is normally or without exception always, leadership.
I think we must begin as individuals and lead ourselves with the tools that we know our effective. We know that great character trumps talent and education.
We also must train our leaders with tools that equips them to their next level and highest level of leadership capacity. The result of good training and good character results in a developing leaders that duplicate effective leadership, resulting in the possible displacement of poor leaders.
Another tension is measuring leaders. A poor leader in one environment is adequate in another. The organization and it’s culture establishes this measure. So measuring leaders is difficult. My rule again of the best leaders are those with both leadership skills and great character!
We cannot fix others, but we can start with ourselves and our teams and make a difference.
I love the blog and the concept but the action plan is not observant and reply, but take action and change ourselves and our environment.
Thank you Mike for another awesome challenge!
Mike Myatt
April 7, 2011 at 5:02 pmHi Tom:
Thanks for evangelizing the topic of personal leadership which has been a consistent theme in many of the comments. Your statement that “We know that great character trumps talent and education.” sums it up quite nicely. Thanks for sharing Tom.
Tom Schulte
April 7, 2011 at 1:26 amSelfishness is at the root of poor leadership.
Selishness is also called other names in hopes to justify it, but it is still selfishness at the core that keeps great results from happing through the efforts of teams. Call it self-preservation, self-focused, self-assuredness, self-control, self-centered, or self-reliance, or whatever you want, it still is a lack of confidence in someone that requires them to take their eye off of the larger objective just to spend time on their own wants, needs, and desires.
When a leader has the right balance of self-confidence and humility, they can spend their time looking outside of self and more toward the needs of the people on the team who are bringing the final results. Leaders who have a focus outside of self are the ones who garner the greatest trust from their followers. They exhibit empathy and communicate in terms that make sense to others.
They can “show up as a giver.”
They get their heads out of their dark side and into the sunlight where everyone else is. They take a values-based approach to leadership.
In my training, I teach this easy to remember formula for leadership success.
It is this: “Values drive Decisions, Decisions drive Behaviors, and Behaviors drive Results.”
Simply understand what your people value most in life and help them attach their heart strings to the larger team vision (that resides outside of them.) By doing this, you will be leading “people” based on what truly motivates them. You will be getting your goals into their hearts. This is when magic happens.
If leaders would take their eyes off of their own reflection in the mirror and start to focus on others, they will get the results that truly make everyone shine.
Mike Myatt
April 7, 2011 at 4:37 pmHi Tom:
You are spot-on. Examine any great leadership success and you’ll find value alignment and/or shared purpose at the core of said success. Leaders who create a culture will allows their organizations to consistently operate in this elusive state of being far exceed the performance of those who don’t. Thanks for sharing Tom.
John Baldoni
April 7, 2011 at 3:23 pmMike, I am going to adopt a contrarian view. Leadership is timeless. The issues change but the character, purpose, vision, drive and compassion remain. Let us not confuse management challenges — e.g. 24/7 timeframes, collocated workforces, virtual supply chains, and changing demographics in the workplace — with leadership issues. Leaders will do what they always do — LEAD!
Mike Myatt
April 7, 2011 at 4:57 pmHi John:Thanks for weighing in. In principle I agree with you, but in reality I’m not so sure…While your comments are contrarian with regard to the comment stream on this post, I think they’re actually more reflective of the status quo on a larger scale. Your caution about management challenges is a very valid and discerning warning. That said, leadership has it’s fair share of challenges as well. I think Mark Oakes made as astute comment earlier in recognizing that the skills which have allowed him to be a successful CEO to this point may not be the same skills required to take him to the next level. I concur that certain time tested principles should always remain in a leader’s tool kit, but not developing, refining, growing, and adapting those skills to meet the changing world around us is the kiss of death for a leader. You are correct that leaders will do what they always do –LEAD! That said, I can tell you with great certainty they MUST do it differently. Leadership is not formulaic – it is a discipline of fluidity that thrives off of contextual innovation and adaptive reasoning. Leaders that fail to understand this will simply fail and not even understand why. John, I respect your work and I suspect we’re not as far apart as our respective comments might suggest. Probably semantics more than anything else. Thanks for sharing John.
Beyond Horizons
June 23, 2011 at 6:34 amI think leadership today lacks a strong ethical and moral base. I read an post by Michael McKinney called ‘ You can be legal and still be wrong’ (http://www.leadershipnow.com/leadingblog/2011/06/you_can_be_legal_and_still_be.html). I think he makes a great point about how leaders today care less and less about the right thing. As long as they are legal, they aren’t worried. I think this shows a serious lack of consideration for people, which is something that needs to change.
– Sindoora (http://www.beyondhorizons.in)