LEADERSHIP
THE ART OF IDENTIFYING EXPECTATION

Although it is clear that leadership, notionally, is in the mind of the beholder, we want clear identification of what things characterize a man or woman who can take the reigns. It is absolutely the new concept of leadership as an ambient affect that might make us think twice about competence and virtue as opposed to a carapace designed to entice us. New models of leadership such as Scientific American’s MIND issue article “NEW INSIGHTS ABOUT LEADERSHIP” are more than a little scary. It is the contention of 30 scientists working around the world to develop a “profile” for leadership that describes a person who “seems” to understand the needs of his legion, and has a strong sense of destiny.  George Bush, and Rudy Guiliani appeared in control, fatherly and reassuring during 9/11’s aftermath. Their speeches, rather than their actions were the stuff of comfort and reestablishing stasis for populations who desperately need reassurance.

The formula for how to lead was crystallized by the experts into three simple points. Must understand the values and opinions of those they lead.  Must not act out of absolute authority but actively create dialogue that binds groups to causes, and leaders to their work forces or colleagues. There are no fixed identifiable traits for persons who are leaders, only that those traits are the most desirable for the group or nature of the group being led. Form an identity for the group and work within that identification, create an agenda and plan that resonates as the concept and natural outcome of the created identity. So. Leaders are most effective when they can induce followers to see the group’s interest as their own interest.

Strangely enough, anything that sets a leader apart from the group can compromise their effectiveness. Although we do respect fairness, that can mean a variety of things to a variety of people. Fairness depends entirely on who the followers are.

Wielding words, identifying reality in the usually heavily politic speeches leaders need to exhort followers into action, we have a layer of analysis to do in assessing whether we are listening to a leader, or listening to the rhetoric required to assume that role.

We may know that a blueprint is needed, and we may feel that our path must be lit by an expert, but the greatest characteristic of leadership for a person in charge is apparently knowing what we need, and convincing us that we are calling out the sign posts as we move as a constituency, company or charitable organization toward the future.

SOURCE ARTICLES

THE NEW PSYCHOLOGY OF LEADERSHIP
Scientific American – September 2007,
Stephen D. Reicher

LEADERSHIP AND NASCENT ABILITY
Carolina Braschia
Ivey School of Business Publications – 2003

LEADERSHIP COVALENCE
Ann Prather
University of Montreal – 2006

SOCIAL INFLUENCE
C. Turner
Open University Press – 1993