IBM recently released the results of a global study called Capitalizing on Complexity, in which they interviewed over 1500 CEOs across 60 countries representing 33 industries. One of the key survey questions was on what these CEOs considered to be the most important leadership qualities over the next five years. 60% of the CEOs regarded creativity as the number one leadership quality, with integrity a close second at 52%. I have attached a full list of all the leadership qualities to this post.
A friend sent me a video link by Derek Sivers in response to my last blog post -T.E.A.M. This short TED conference presentation (3:10 mins) is on how leaders start movements. I found it very interesting so I decided to share the video with my blog’s readers along with an overview of the key points I gained from it. Sivers communicates powerful leadership principles using video scenes from an outdoor music concert.
Most of the literature on leadership focuses on identifying the types and traits that make successful leaders. There is limited focus on followership. Yet without followership, there is no leadership.
One of John Maxwell’s favourite leadership quotes is, “He who thinks he leads, but has no followers, is only taking a walk.” Robert Neuschel said that “The sine qua non of leadership is to recognize that accomplishments can be made only through your people.” This is because people are the primary work materials at a leader’s disposal. A leader’s followers are his team and as part of the team; it is his or her responsibility to make the team greater through his/her leadership presence. A leader who makes his/her leadership all about ‘me’ instead of the ‘team’ destroys the unity of the team.
Everyone has leadership potential but few are willing to develop it. Why do so many people waste their leadership potential? I addressed the burden of responsibility as an obstacle in a previous blog post. I believe that another reason is the price that such personal development demands. It is hard work to develop your leadership potential. Think of it as a muscle. Now consider the price involved to develop a muscular framework. The amount of time you have to spend in the gym and constantly watching what you eat are just two key costs of having a toned body. You have to endure some pain in order to build your muscles. The ‘perfect’ body requires a disciplined lifestyle; likewise you can’t develop your leadership potential without the discipline of hard work.
In the movie Matrix, Laurence Fishburne’s character, Morpheus, said to Neo (Keanu Reeves) – “There is a difference between knowing the path and walking the path.” This quote can be linked to the change process. We have all experienced the difficulty of walking the path. There is a big difference between knowing what to change in a personal or organizational context and successfully implementing that change.
The most consistent thing in the 21st century is change. We simply can’t escape it. It occurs so quickly that leaders and organisations have to be adaptable or risk becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Leaders are expected to be change agents in their organisations. They are required to instigate and implement change initiatives that improve the effectiveness, competitiveness and profitability of their organisations. Change initiatives usually fail because leaders fail to account for the role of transition in implementing them. Change and transition are sometimes used interchangeably but they don’t mean the same thing.
There is a major misconception that only people with titles are leaders, so if you don’t have a title e.g. CEO, General, Pastor, Professor, then you are not a leader. A lot of leadership that goes on in the world is done by people who have no formal leadership titles, but yet are bringing about change in their communities, cities and countries.
The demands on a leader’s time are infinite but his/her time is finite. The ability to maximise finite time is essential for both personal and professional success. Leaders should aspire to be both effective and efficient in executing their responsibilities. It is, however, important to know the difference between these terms because some leaders don’t. This knowledge prevents such leaders from putting the cart before the horse.
I mentioned in my last post that most business or leadership plans rarely go according to plan, but effective leadership is needed to deal with both foreseeable and unforeseeable disruptions. Unplanned disruptions cause stress and the choices a leader makes when his best laid plans go astray define his leadership. Does he have a plan B when plan A fails?
It is interesting that people will rather follow a person who they believe in but has a mediocre vision than a person who they are not sure of but who has a great vision. This is a result of the law of buy-in. According to Mike Walton, leaders need others’ buy-in to succeed in the twenty-first century. He defines ‘buy-in’ as the understanding, commitment and action in support of the leadership goals and vision. The ability to influence people’s thoughts and feelings, to generate their buy-in is a required leadership skill.
