Leadership Failure

There are certain key phrases that I listen out for coming from my own mouth. One of these is

"... because I'm the boss and I asked you to do it"

or any one of it's derived relatives.

If I ever hear a statement like that pass my lips then I take it as a sign that I've failed somehow as a leader (note, I'm not saying that I don't have the right to say it).

Why?

Because one of my functions as a leader is to provide people a goal/vision to work toward. If they have this then it should be self evident why they do the tasks they do. If someone questions the task then I should take that as a sign that I am not communicating the goal/vision well enough.

The problem is that it takes a lot of effort to communicate a goal/vision, far more than it does to order someone to do something. But that, to me, is the difference between a boss and a leader. A boss's primary function is to get the job done. A leader's primary function is other people and taking them on a journey. The reality of my life is that I am both (and also a worker with a boss), but I'd like to think that I lean toward the leader side of things more.

Even worse than the aforementioned statement is the emotional bullet after the fact eg

" ... by not doing what I asked you are not showing me respect ..."

The statement may be true (although I would always be hesitant to state other peoples intentions - much better to say "I don't feel respected"). However, we should switch it around and if someone hasn't done the task asked of them then take it as a sign that we haven't communicated the "why" clearly enough.

And saying a statement like that is essentially an emotional power-play. No-one can defend themselves under that kind of accusation. And it certainly doesn't help get the task done, nor inspire anyone to do differently next time.

We can always learn something about ourselves from other people even through their inaction.

Thoughts on Leadership

Someone recently said to me that the goal of being a leader was to train people to be at least as good as yourself. Well with all due respect (and I do have a high level of respect for that person), I disagree. If that is "the" goal then it implies leadership is based on a persons capabilities/skills in a particular field. However I suspect the General of an army is not the best sniper, tank driver, unarmed combatant, etc. Nor is the CEO of a bank the best financial expert. Nor (ideally) is the prime minister/president of a country the best policy maker, politician, orator.

So why are these people the leaders? Well simply put because they are the best "leaders" ie I believe leadership is a skill/gifting in and of itself. Therefore in any organisation the role of a leader is different to the roles of those being led.

So what is the goal of a leader? To draw out the best in the people being led to achieve a particular goal/vision. A general's role is to make his soldiers into better soldiers, in whatever field, to win a battle or a war. A CEO of a corporation aims to produce experts who can provide strong growth (financial or otherwise). A head of government draws the best policies out of their executive to improve their nation. A head master develops the best educators who in turn produce the best students. And so on ... you get the idea.

If we take on this view of leadership then we understand that the role of a leader is to serve those whom they lead. The leader is to develop/draw the best from their followers who in turn will deliver the results to achieve the vision. Once we understand the why of leadership, then we can better work on the how-to of leadership (and there are a multitude of books, experts, opinions on the subject).

One final thought: everyone follows someone and everyone leads someone - at the very least we should be leading our own lives. Most of us will also have families, friends, work colleagues that we also lead in some aspect. We should be aware that our role is to serve these people, to draw the very best out of them that we can.