Let's talk about leadership

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

Originally Posted by 72_Wilderness

In Scouts we could never resort to the legal powers because we had none.

Legal, or legitimate, power is just one of the sources of power that a leader can exercise. There are other sources more important. Referent power which deals with the strength of the relationship between the leader and the followers. This occurs when the follows look at the leader and sees a role model for instance. There is expert power which is really the power of knowledge which occurs because someone has relative expertise inparticular areas. There is reward power which has to do with the control over desired resources. There is also coercive power which deals with negative sanctions. Probably the most important aspect of power for a good leader is referent power because it is "granted" to him/her by his/her followers which has to do with that respect you were talking about. Of course, the exercise of power is just part of the tools in a leaders rucksack. The exercise of leadership is a whole lot more complicated than just the study of power. It is both a science and an art, rational and emotional, and very personal based on ones ability to first know oneself.

[x SF med]

Outstanding synopsis of power and leadership COL M - you put it into a nutshell. I worked for a lot of competent people, who could not lead worth a damn - but the few who were real leaders, inspired all of the team to aspire to the same level of excellence as they had set for themselves.

[Five-O]

They say you salute the rank not the man. When men salute the man and not the rank you are a leader....regardless of rank. Strength of character and a sense of humor near the top of my list. Great post.

[frostfire]

Originally Posted by Jack Moroney

Leadership is all about enabling your subordinates to succeed.

Legal, or legitimate, power is just one of the sources of power that a leader can exercise. There are other sources more important. Referent power which deals with the strength of the relationship between the leader and the followers. This occurs when the follows look at the leader and sees a role model for instance. There is expert power which is really the power of knowledge which occurs because someone has relative expertise inparticular areas. There is reward power which has to do with the control over desired resources. There is also coercive power which deals with negative sanctions. Probably the most important aspect of power for a good leader is referent power because it is "granted" to him/her by his/her followers which has to do with that respect you were talking about. Of course, the exercise of power is just part of the tools in a leaders rucksack. The exercise of leadership is a whole lot more complicated than just the study of power. It is both a science and an art, rational and emotional, and very personal based on ones ability to first know oneself.

wow...that's the summary of Nahavandi, A. (2003) The art and science of leadership chapter four. The book also covers that a good leader is contingent upon his/her ability find situations that match his leadership style or adjust his style to current situation. Ok, nothing new here.

If I got anything engraved on my gray matter from reading MSG Howe book, thar would be a leader empowers the team members at any setting.

I learnt a while back that you can tell a team has had a good leader if upon his departure, another good leader would emerge from the team.

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

Originally Posted by frostfire

wow...that's the summary of Nahavandi, A. (2003) [.

Interesting, never heard of this person, but evidently the author discovered nothing that was not being practiced in the community long before publishing the book. You are right, there really is nothing "new" in the arena of leadership as far as theories and espoused practices. Trying to capture leadership in print is sort of like trying to explain any other intangible trait where the definition is described by an action under a set of multiple variables that can never be duplicated again in the same time and space continuum. Remember that the exercise of leadership and all the physcial and psychological aspects are going to be driven by personal strenghts and influenced by factors over which those caught in the situation have no control. The best you can hope for is that the person confronted with those variables is equipped through training, experience, luck by having the right folks and resources with him at the right time and place to create a favorable outcome.
No one wakes up one day and says, "Today I am going to be a leader" anymore than anyone can invest upon you the mantel of leadership by virtue of assignment, study, or wish. The bottom line is that you can read any book, review any study, and go through any training program, but you just do not know what you are going to do until the situation presents itself. I will also tell you that those that rise to the occassion in one situation may fail miserably in another.

[incommin]

Back to the age old discussion of are great leaders born? Are they created or made? Are they a product of the right moment in time and circumstances? Or all of the above?

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

Originally Posted by incommin

Back to the age old discussion of are great leaders born? Are they created or made? Are they a product of the right moment in time and circumstances? Or all of the above?

I think you can make arguments for all of the above. Certainly charismatic leaders are event driven and when the "crisis" that allowed them to rise is gone so is their effectiveness. Born can be a timing thing as much as a character development event that builds traits and effects outlooks but I do not think genetics plays a major role. I can think of any number of offspring who could not walk in their parents shoes and any number of parents whose offspring outstanding accomplishments' belie their heritage. Given the right mix of personal characteristics, training, guidance, events, and circumstance leaders can arise or fall. In the meantime academicians will garner big bucks analyzing what makes a leader or a tyrant and entreprenures will package material to convince anyone that they too can lead the world if only that person would maximize his/her capability by allowing the entre"manure" to bring out his/her latent potential. In the meantime, those organizations that rely on folks to perform "leadership functions" need to grow their own by providing the tools and training for those that have been assessed and selected to met the requirements deemed as necessary for success in accordance with the vision, mission, goals, standards and unknown but expected variables under which they expect their leaders to function. One size does not fit all any more than one style of leadership. That, in my humble opinion, is why it is a fine balancing act between both an art and a science and it is not a static formula but a dynamic process that is environment and event driven.

[incommin]

When saying born I don't think the thought is of genetic line. I think it is more of what that person is at birth that allows them to become a type A or B; hormones that influence brain wiring and physical development; and social status that influences development. Just like our fingerprints, we are not all the same at birth. We don't start equal. We don't learn at the same rates. We think and function differently right from birth.

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

Originally Posted by incommin

When saying born I don't think the thought is of genetic line. I think it is more of what that person is at birth that allows them to become a type A or B; hormones that influence brain wiring and physical development; and social status that influences development. Just like our fingerprints, we are not all the same at birth. We don't start equal. We don't learn at the same rates. We think and function differently right from birth.

Yep, but hormones are determined by genetic make up and can be impacted upon by environmental factors. As far as type A and type B personalities, each has a role in different situations which is why I believe there is no one size fits all when it comes to leadership. As far as social status, we all know outstanding leaders from every walk of life but where folks get themselves into trouble is when leaders, especially in the military, view rank and leadership as step up in their social status and wear it like a badge rather than accepting it for what it should be as another level of responsibility with which to enable those for whom you are responsible to succeed. Rank is a promotion it is not a leadership catagory or style it just provides more legitimate, coercive and reward power for the "leader" to use but does not necessarily provide the individual the important referrent or professional power which are more important when it comes to exercising good leadership. I think you can make arguments both for and against where in the food chain someone was born when it comes to providing a plus in education, development, and opportunities for growth but IMHO it is not in anyway a determinent factor in predicting who will or will not become a leader.

[12B4S]

All great insight. Just cutting it to the quick. Taking it to leadership in combat. All the above applies and if this was posted, I missed it.

Lead from the front............

[x SF med]

Leadership is also about respect - given and received - they go hand in hand, but respect is earned. Those that have learned how to follow usually make very good leaders - they understand what is being asked of them.

[incommin]

I do not think that learning to follow has much to do with becoming an effective leader. The world is full of followers. In fact, most of the population are followers. They want someone to lead, to tell them what to do, to make life easier for them. But they do not want the responsibility that goes with leadership! I have known hundres of good soldiers who followed well; soldiers who helped leaders look good. But they did not have the stomach or drive to step into a leadership role. They didn't want the headaches that come with leading and training other soldiers.

[x SF med]

IC - a born leader who has never followed has no clue what it takes to follow orders, and in many cases becomes ineffective because he does not understand what it takes to bend to another's decision. And in many cases, the great leader you may be following (or the good leader you are) has to be following direction of a leader above himself.

Another salient point to this discussion is the ability to lead from behind, to allow a less effective leader to remain in the forefront while guiding him - can you say UW/GW - the G chief is in charge - but you have to lead him.... and follow his command. The best SF soldiers intuitively get this, and many get peered, ID'd , or recycled because they don't get it and want to 'be in charge' leadership is not about being in charge....

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

Originally Posted by incommin

I do not think that learning to follow has much to do with becoming an effective leader. .

Kinda depends on what you mean by following. I think it is important to be able to empathize with the chain of command above you so you have a basic understanding where they are coming from. It sort of allows you to anticipate how they are going to react to what you might be about to do which gives you a leg up when it comes to doing what needs to be done both for the mission and more importantly for the troops. Also goes along with understanding in a tactical/operational sense what the next two echelons above you are up to so that you can execute intelligent initiative vice just initiative. It is also important to be a good follower from the standpoint that if you have an inclination to tell the boss to go pound sand everytime you disagree with him you are still going to usually wind up executing his instructions but under his terms and not yours. The folks that suffer then are your troops. Learning to follow is more of an art in determining how the leader above you thinks. Once you learn that you can manage from below, short cut the stupid decisions, have input into actions before they occur and while you may have to eat a little crow once in a while you will never have to eat the whole damn flock and your troops are better off for it.

[incommin]

Any intelligent leader or follower will quickly learn the idology of the leaders above him and stay within the boundries that are set for him/her. I was a very effective senior NCO (or so my records say) and yet I would have not been as good as an officer...... because I did not want to be one!