September 2, 2007

As I have considered what constitutes leadership, I don't believe position alone to be a good definition of a leader. I have known people in positions of authority who did not inspire others to action, they were just able to give orders. Conversely, the people I have known to be good leaders were committed to the organization and became the catalyst for others to want to do their best. Those leaders do not have to be in positions of formal authority; informal leaders are sometimes more effective than formal ones.

I have been a part of volunteer organizations as well as paid job positions. In each type of organization there have to be those who lead. A "chain of command" or hierarchy is a part of any group with more than one person involved, without which the group would flounder. When I was in the volunteer rescue squad, there were people in positions of authority. And, since there was no pay for the time I spent on duty, my motivation to do what needed to be done had to come from inside myself. The individuals I answered to were not, in my opinion, always the "cream of the crop," but rather were the ones who spent the most time at the squad. The leadership demonstrated by some of the people in charge was more ego driven than inspirational. As a result, I learned to do what needed to be done and did well in spite of the lack of respect for the formal leadership.

As I have grown as a person, and have taken on formal leadership roles, my own style of leadership has been shaped by many people. I have tried to learn good leadership techniques from those whom I respected, but equally important to me has been what I have learned from those I have not had the greatest of respect for. For whether it is in my church or at my job, one of the most important pieces of leadership is to be trusted. If those for whom I am responsible don't have trust in me, then all I am is an order giver and not an effective leader.

An aspect of leadership that I haven't previously given much thought to is this: just because someone has followers, are they truly a good leader? Even if the followers truly believe in what the leader is espousing, is leadership just the ability to get people to trust them and follow? Jim Jones had many people following him to Guyana and utopia, but was death a positive outcome for them? People trust the Rev. Sun Young Moon, but is he a "good" leader? Leaders of militia groups have many people under their influence, but do they represent "good" leadership? I could go on with many cult and radical group leaders and in most cases probably make an effective argument that they lack a moral center that keeps them from going astray. Then again, many will say something like, "whatever they want to believe is o.k as long as they don't hurt me."

In our society, should our leaders allow people to do whatever they want as long as no one is hurt? Are there absolute rights and wrongs that should be tightly adhered to by our government leaders? I believe leadership is as much about standing for what is right as it is influencing others to do the right thing. Politicians will take a stand against an issue like abortion or gay rights at one point in their career, but later, if it appears politically expedient, will change to attract more voters. Did the issue of abortion or gay rights become more right or less wrong than before? Again, standing for what one believes in and remaining firm in that belief is the hallmark of a good leader.