Friday, January 4, 2013

On Leadership, a Slippery Idea


    
 I read a lot on leadership (since board governance is a form of leadership). I am struck by the number of authors who try to pin it down to a few, (e.g., Kouzes and Pozner)—or many attributes. (John Maxwell comes to mind). The numbers of ways people find to dice up leadership boggles my mind …and confuses. It ranges from such terms as “influence” (not helpful—too broad) to three or five items such as in Kouzes and Posner’s “Five Principles,” to Maxwell’s 21, to … 

That should tip us off that leadership is one of those abilities we recognize when we see it, but trying to get a net around it is another issue. Yet academics and consultants keep trying.
I would tend to describe “leadership” as a constellation of attributes that equips and enables one to align and influence others to move in the direction desired by the leader. Somehow successful movement toward an objective should also be a criterion, since (successful) strategic thinking is considered a vital attribute of leadership. And leadership is definitely situational. Successful leadership in combat does not (necessarily) translate to successful leadership in a nonprofit ministry but, nonetheless, shares several attributes. Note, this “definition” so far is value neutral. Good leadership adds virtue and values. I would also add wisdom, as Biblically defined - thinking well is inextricably intertwined with rectitude. So a good leader is virtuous and wise as well as possessing a host of value-neutral attributes enabling aligned, directional, successful influence.
Oh well. That is my first, or twentieth, shot at it. And I haven’t begun to touch the components of the attribute constellation.

(Originally posted on our website Nov. 26, 2012)
RMB

No comments: