There is probably no single topic about which more BS has been written than leadership. In fact, there are almost as many definitions of leadership as there are writers. To make matters worse, many definitions simply don’t tell you anything helpful. Here are some definitions.
Cambridge International Dictionary: “Leadership is the set of characteristics that make a good leader. Leadership is also the position of being a leader.”
Wally's Comment: This seems to me to go in circles. A lot of leadership definitions are like this, defining leadership as what leaders do, without telling you what that might be.
Warren Bennis: “The new leader ... is one who commits people to action, who coverts followers into leaders, and who may convert leaders into agents of change.”
Wally's Comment: I’m always leery of “new” leadership. It seems to me that leadership hasn’t changed all that much since Caesar was leading his Legions into Gaul.
Bennis is one of the great writers on leadership, though. You might want to check out two of his books. There's “Leaders” which he wrote with Burt Nanus. And there's a recent book, “Geeks and Geezers” which has an excellent discussion of the role of crucibles (we might call them critical incidents) in developing leadership.
Howard Gardner: “... persons who, by word and/or personal example, markedly influence the behaviors, thoughts and feelings of a significant number of their fellow human beings.”
Wally's Comment: This is a good definition, but it's way too broad. There's nothing here about accomplishing a mission or common task. By this definition every good writer would be a leader.
Gardner is a Harvard psychologist, most famous for his theory of multiple intelligences. He has written an excellent book about leadership called “Leading Minds.” It deals with the career path that great leaders seem to follow in different field.
Dwight Eisenhower: “the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it.”
Wally's Comment: I love this definition, but it's way too narrow. It leaves out the part about getting groups of folks to accomplish important missions, the very thing that Ike was good at. His book, “Crusade in Europe” is an excellent view of how he led the joint forces in Europe during World War II.
My favorite book of his for leadership reading is “At Ease: Stories I Tell to Friends” which gives a glimpse into his own development and the tremendous debt he owed to a mentor, General Fox Connor. There's good material about Eisenhower in Puryear's excellent book, “Nineteen Stars.”
When you review as many of the definitions as you can handle, you start to notice that there are some common dimensions to just about everyone's definition of leadership.
Key Dimensions
Leadership involves the performance of a group. Leaders don’t lead in isolation. They lead a group of people who have some mission to accomplish.
Leadership involves setting direction. Leadership is about changing the current state of affairs, about getting from one place to another.
Two Kinds of Leadership
Anyone responsible for group performance is a leader. When you get put in charge of a group you are the leader because you have the position. People pay attention to what you do and say because you’re the leader. You have no choice in this. The only choice you have is whether or not to be an effective leader.
But we all know that there are some folks who influence the actions and direction of a group, even if they’re not, nominally, in charge. I call that Art Jones Leadership.
Art was a sergeant with the San Leandro Police Department for many years. He was a great sergeant. He was a leader beyond the groups of men and women that he was given formal charge of.
Art was a leader because his values and ideas affected everyone who came in contact with him. One day, years after Art had retired, I was sitting in a meeting at his old department. As we discussed the items on the agenda, folks around the table would say things like, “I wonder what Art would think about this?” or “Art would really like this.” Even absent, he affected the group, most of whom were far above the highest rank Art ever attained.
Three Roles When You're Responsible for Group Performance
When you become responsible for the performance of a group, there are three roles you must fill. They’re all part of leadership at every level, from first line supervisor, to the chief or sheriff.
There is the core work of Leadership which deals with purpose, direction and values.
There is the work of Management which deals with groups and priorities.
And there is the work of Supervision which deals with individuals and tasks.
All of these are important.
