The Gray Monk

« Terrorism and freedom .... | Main | Epiphany greetings .... »

January 06, 2005

Born or made?

Shock!

Horror!

The dreadful truth may well be out! Leaders tend to have been born and not "developed"! That is the conclusion of a survey conducted recently of the leaders and captains of UK Industry and Commerce. Almost all of them, according to an article in the Telegraph, were in some leadership role from the moment they hit pre-school!

This rather inconvenient revelation exposes the false argument that everyone has the potential to be a leader. In fact it blows a hole in it, but I suspect that it will be many years yet before the shibolleth that "leaders" can be "made" dies the death so sorely needed. It is my experience that natural leaders have an ability to inspire those under them to perform almost any task. They are coercive and persuasive, they have the knack of knowing how to get the best from people - and how to demolish them with a word or a gesture, if needed. They share things with their "teams" and give all the appearance of being totally open and honest. The "made" leader often lacks the confidence to lead and either falls back on the "committee" approach, mistaking this for "teamwork", or the totally autocratic and dicatorial method. Neither inspires the troops with much confidence.

Look at the great leaders of history. While you would probably not invite Alexander the Great home for dinner willingly, it would be difficult to overlook the fact that this often violent man had a charisma that insired his friends and follwers, leading them to victory after victory even when they were apparently hopelessly outnumbered. Winston Churchill was hardly everyone's favourite (and co-incidently broke the mould of "leadership" at school, never having been a prefect or team captain, instead being a rebel, always challenging authority) yet he rose to be possibly this countries greatest ever Prime Minister. Another on my list would be a certain Erwin Rommel, and I would add to that Admiral A B Cunningham, C-in-C of the Mediterranean Fleet in the worst period of the second World War.

A leader is one who has a natural ability to work with people, often people he does not know, and inspire them to trust his judgement. Leaders know when to allow underlings to make the decisions and when to take charge. They also know that the ultimate responsibility always rests with them and no one else. You never hear a leader say "So-and-so wants us to ...", instead it is "I want .." or "I think we will ...", the distinction being that he takes full responsibility for whatever follows. More often than not, a "manager" will say "HQ want us to do .." and thus passes the responsibility to someone else. If it goes wrong, he will say, "I was following orders" and try to keep out from under. The Leader type will not; he will agree that his decision was wrong, set out why he took it under the circumstances, and try to repair the damage.

In a career filled with some interesting memories, I can think of several "leaders" I have worked with or witnessed in action and even more "managers" who I would not have been keen to follow anywhere dangerous. The distinction I noticed was apparent in the first navy Captain I experienced. He never raised his voice, never swore, and yet everyone walked exactly where he led. His authority was apparent even when he was relaxing sailing our 33 foot Montague Whaler with a hand picked crew of conscripts (including yours truly!); it was present in his easy confidence even out of uniform. He could laugh at our jokes, share a picnic basket, a cigarette and a beer with us, then, when needed, switch instantly to Command mode - and no one ever thought to challenge him. By contrast some of the junior officers could not even begin to do this - and even now, when I meet them years on and in much higher ranks, they still cannot. What was the difference? In part it was breeding - our Captain came from a family who had always been "Navy", had always been leaders, and always worn authority. I dare say that even as a Midshipman he would have been a leader and not a follower.

Another of my friends falls into this category as well, affable and always convivial, he is a scion of one of our "older" families and it shows. He is not a big man, yet size is not important, when it matters, or when challenged there is an instant awareness of authority, and he seems to grow to twice his size and presence. A natural leader even in authoritarian mode, he exudes confident personality and that inspires those who work with and for him. It also intimidates those who don't understand the true qualities of leadership. Perhaps that is why they are afraid of leaders and prefer to degrade the term to include their confused concept of a fluffy wooly cuddly friendly "we're all in this together" style and are then astonished when they find themselves devoid of respect or authority.

None of these qualities can be taught, they are bred into someone, and it is a fortunate man or woman who has them. They are the people who, in a crisis, rise from the background, sweep aside the bureaucrats and the managers, and accomplish the job. It should be no surprise that the successful corporations and companies in our world today are all ones that have charismatic leaders at the helm. The reason? It flows from the difference between leaders and managers - when change is required, the successful corporation is led through it and it sticks; the unsuccessful corporation employs "change managers", and as soon as they move on, it all comes unglued.

A leader is always someone that is respected by those around him, respected for his inspiration, his ability, and his compassion. These qualities are often what the manager lacks. He manages and more often micro-manges staff. He cannot trust them to do the job without constant supervision whereas the leader knows the difference and allows his people the scope to develop their own abilities and to exercise their own authority without supervision and interference unless it is warranted.

It will be interesting to see what further research is done on this, although I suspect it will be a brave researcher who takes this one on and tries to overcome the last sixty or so years of psycho-babble that has produced the current view that everyone has the same ability to lead. It just is not so, and the sooner that is recognised and accepted, the better off we all will be, for the obstacle to useful development and growth will have, at long last, been removed.

Posted by The Gray Monk at January 6, 2005 09:12 AM

Comments

Posted by: The Scarlet Manuka at January 6, 2005 07:25 PM