Everybody with a Coin to Toss Is Not a Leader

The “Great Man Theory” surfaced in the 19th Century to explain leadership throughout history: heroes possessing charisma, intelligence, wisdom, and power had created history. No theory escapes criticism, however, and detractors of this one surfaced quickly. According to critics, attributing historical events to the decisions of individuals—these supposedly “great men”—was both primitive and unscientific. As these theorists explained, “great men” were simply products of their social environments.

In the 21st Century, we realize we still need great men and women, but we can’t count on them to unleash their greatness in a vacuum. Instead, we need to redefine our language—to explain success not in terms of “great man” or “environment”—but by what author Tom Davenport called “organizational judgment,” the collective capacity to make effective decisions that exceeds the scope of any one leader’s talent.

Not everyone with a coin to toss qualifies as a decision-maker—at least not an effective one. It takes more. It requires us to abandon the reasoning processes that entrap us in patterns of behavior we hate but cannot seem to change. Too often these traps, based on unexamined beliefs and fears, become self-sealing, self-perpetuating, and self-sabotaging; and our best efforts to escape them merely tighten their grip.

Conversely, when leaders start with exceptional decision-makers and then create an environment where these decision-makers can make their best tough calls, both individually and collectively, leaders position the organization for effective organizational judgment and change. They all soon learn that unsuccessful decision-makers focus only on the current situation. Successful people base their decisions on where they want to be in the future.