Developing The 3 Legged Leader: Why Business Schools and Most Leadership Experts Get it Wrong

Leadership cannot be reverse engineered. You cannot dissect a great leader, weigh the components and then apply the qualities and behaviors to assemble a fleet of like-performing leaders. Yet this is precisely what the social science of theoretical leadership attempts to do.

Business schools teach this science, and thousands upon thousands of books have been written based on new theories on how to build the perfect leader. But none reliably produce effective, much less extraordinary leaders. Why is it so difficult to become a fully competent leader? And why is extraordinary leadership so rare and elusive?

Perhaps it is that leadership is much less science than it is art.

When we examine the quality of leadership we tend to look at what leaders do. The assumption is that if we teach people to do the same we will get the same results. We do not. In truth, the only way to measure leadership is to assess the results of the leader's actions, not the actions themselves. It is not simply that the ends justify the means, but that the consequences of a leaders actions are caused by who they are more than what they do.

You can't give an average person a baseball bat of even the finest quality and expect them to hit a 95-m.p.h. fastball of a major league pitcher, nor can you hand anyone off the street the ingredients and cooking tools for a perfect soufflé and expect professional results. It is not the tools, it is the person whose hands the tools are in.

Some people have a knack or natural talent to perform certain roles, and leadership is a role. Talent will only get you so far. Performance is always the result of developing our talents. Leadership is no different than any performing art; it requires a dedication to personal development and improving through practice.

Even child prodigies develop through practice. No one is born a virtuoso performer.

Science can play a part in improving human performance. We can accelerate the pace of our learning, increase the efficiency of physical development and stamina, provide more beneficial nutrients (or even harmful non-nutrients such as performance enhancing drugs), and condition our thinking to maintain better focus - but none of these things actually build a top-performer in any field. There is no bionic ballet dancer, pole-vaulter or violinist. And there is no bionic leader.

So, how do we develop leaders?

The answer is we don't. Leaders develop themselves. We can encourage, inspire and equip people to become leaders, but leadership is something that is learned but cannot be taught. Fortunately, there are three key factors that contribute to any individuals ability to become a fully competent leader. They are:

1. Curiosity
2. Caring
3. Capability

Curiosity is more than just being inquisitive, it's being constantly thirsty for learning. People who are fully curious are not just able learners; they are adaptable, coachable and humble. It takes humility to accept that we don't know what we need to know. It takes courage in order to accept being wrong. And it takes respect for views contrary to our own in order to open our minds to new and better possibilities. Curious people are "learning beings" and view knowledge as a tool and a means to further learning. They differentiate themselves from "knowing beings" who collect knowledge and store it away - and in some cases unscrupulously steal knowledge from others in pursuit of power - by being caring and generous.

Caring is always relative. Everyone cares about something, but not everyone cares about the same things. Great leaders care about what those who might follow them care about. They invariably lead based on caring about something larger and greater than themselves.

Great leaders have a sense of duty to whatever drives them and care to the point that they are willing to sacrifice their own personal interests for the needs of that cause.

This is a matter of conscience. It is conscientiousness that drives us to sacrifice our comfort and even our safety in pursuit of a cause. We choose to follow conscientious leaders because we believe that they care about what we care about. And leaders select followers for the same reason. Competent leaders care deeply about the things that matter to others - not just themselves. And they are forever asking questions about how they should best develop themselves, serve their cause, develop their people and build their organizations.

Capability is the fully pragmatic aspect of competent leaders. No one has ever done anything that cannot be done. And we don't really know that things can be done until they are. Great leaders know their capacities and capabilities and understand that these are elastic constraints. They push themselves to become more and more capable, or if they are truly conscientious will hand off the reigns when they find someone more capable than themselves.

Leadership virtuosity is a three-legged stool. Without all three traits developed a leader is not sturdy. Leadership bears the weight of the entire organization - plus the cause it serves. Without sturdy, reliable leadership people, organizations and even nations topple. Rather than focusing on building leaders - we should focus instead on developing leadership - understanding that there isn't a book or a school that can teach what it takes to become a virtuoso - but that the role of education is to equip the mind so it might be curious, caring and capable.

###

Phil Liebman is the CEO and founder of ALPS Leadership and a Vistage Chair since 2005. He earned his Master of Leadership Arts and Sciences at The Thayer Institute - studying High-Performance Organizations and Competent Leadership under Dr. Lee Thayer. You can learn more about what it takes to become a more effective leader and building and growing sustainable high-performance organizations by visiting ALPS Leadership at www.ALPSLeadership.com