What Leadership Isn't!

????I do so believe that we as individuals have a cultural misunderstanding as to what leadership is.? If one hundred people were told to write down on a 3 x 5 card what makes a great leader, you would get one-hundred different answers.?And this is because we tend to look at what we value in leadership traits, but that isn't really what the answer to the question is.?We spend so much time on books and articles and seminars talking about what leadership is.?We hold up leaders as Abraham Lincoln, or Winston Churchill or Mahatma Gandhi or Steve Jobs as great leaders of their day, and it is true they are great leaders in their own right.?But trying to pare down one trait that they all shared, and “it” being the secret to great leadership is an impossible and fruitless task.?Like in the movie Kung Fu Panda, there is no secret ingredient to Secret Ingredient Noodle Soup.?Nor is there some secret to great leadership, at least not one easily discernable.??So the truth of the matter is that we find it easy to talk about leadership, to point at people we see as leaders, to discuss traits we like in leaders that separate them from others, yet do we really possess a deeper understanding of what leadership is? Or better yet, how to get there??

First, a basic definition as to what I reference as leadership . . . Leadership entails two or more people. The leader and those he/she/they are leading.?This has also been described as politics, but the difference being that leadership is about guiding the whole group (i.e. two or more persons) to a specific goal.?Politics is about imposing your will over the group to attain what you and the larger/stronger members of the group want.

Yet even with that definition, it doesn’t come close to bringing clarity to what leadership is.?Toward that end, it may be easier to examine some of the false pretenses of how we view leadership.?Examining what leadership isn’t may help us find some of those things that leadership actually is.?So let’s start.

?Leadership is not simply being the one who makes the decisions

When I was young, I honestly thought that being a leader, was simply having the power and authority to make decisions.?If you were made the captain of the kickball team growing up, it was your job to choose the players for your team and tell people where to stand and what order they kick.?You made the decisions and that was it.?As children, when we dream of being the boss at work, it usually entails telling people what to do.?Possibly yelling into the phone and slamming it down.?Maybe you even get a chance to yell a bit at someone in person.?Isn’t that what the movies tell us??Or worse, maybe that was what you learned at home from your parents (which is where many of our leadership archetypes start)?

Leadership in the workplace doesn’t work that way.?Not really, except maybe when it entails some really bad leadership (which is what movies like to emphasize and generally get right).?Yet, if we observe whom we think are great leaders, and we see those persons giving orders.?Does that mean that leadership is simply telling other people what to do??I had a boss who was a great leader, and he read the Wall Street Journal every day.?Yet reading the Wall Street Journal will not necessarily make you even a good leader, just like telling people what to do doesn’t make you a good leader.?He met with all of his direct reports on a weekly basis, yet that didn’t necessarily make him a great leader.?

It helps us as leaders to read, study and learn and further our own understanding.?Meeting with your direct reports to understand how the business is functioning, what they are doing, how they are doing, and what else they may need if they are to be successful, helps both your direct reports and yourself to be successful.??We as leaders must at times give direction and marching orders, but it should be more about aligning their direction AND yours to achieve the end goal.

?

Managing is not Leadership

?Leadership can entail management, but management is NOT leadership.?If you’ve been in a leadership role over others even for one day, you know first and foremost, that being in such a role means greater responsibility.?If those who report to you don’t get their job done, who is ultimately responsible??You, the leader.?There may be extenuating circumstances.?You can divert attention.?Blame other people. But ultimately, if the work doesn’t get done, you not getting people properly focused and getting the job done will get you the blame. ?Now you know why you always see the boss yelling in the movies (and sometimes in real life).????

As an ex-minister, I can’t help but dip back into the Scriptures and find examples from time to time to make my points.?In the book of Acts (Acts 6:1-7), there is a situation that is described at the very beginning of Christianity.?A large revival began and had spread to over 3,000 people, the first Christians.?These were broken into two large, culturally diverse groups.?The Hebraic Jews were the locals (Jerusalem and the areas held by the Jews), and the Hellenistic Jews were the visitors (from the greater Roman Empire).

As the revival continued, one of the more mundane issues that came up was helping/supporting widows who could not support themselves.?An early version of Meals on Wheels, if you will.?The issue that rose up out of this was that those who were not from the area (Hellenistic), were being neglected by the locals (Hebraic).?The Twelve Disciples (all Hebraic) were spending inordinate amounts of time “waiting on tables” and not following their true calling.?

But the Twelve Disciples didn’t just manage this situation or else it probably would not have even been a footnote to history.?Instead, they led.?And they did so on two fronts.?First, they realized that they couldn’t “manage” this situation.?They needed others to step up, so they could focus on their primary responsibilities.?

All too often, we forget that a core part of leadership is delegation.??My mother was horrible about this when it came to housework.?We could never achieve her standards for clean, and she didn’t have time to bother teaching us.?It was just easier for her to do it all.?If I made my bed, she would remake it to her standards.?I will honestly say that she did no favors for my wife.?It took years for me to actually learn (and break the bad habits that I formed).??Yet, I learned with my two oldest daughters, when teaching them how to clean the bathroom that I first had to teach them by doing, delegate the responsibility, and then actually follow up to ensure they were doing it correctly.?Toilets and countertops were not cleaned properly on the first (of many) go-rounds.?I made them go back and clean it again to my standards (not quite my mother’s standards, but definitely meeting my wife’s standards).?My wife was thrilled that she didn’t have to do it.?Frankly so was I in the long run.

The point is that to lead (and delegate), we MUST allow others to not only step into leadership roles, we MUST train them to be good leaders, allow them the opportunity to make mistakes (learning from them) and eventually using them to replace ourselves.?And we do this so that we can accomplish our own greater responsibilities (like a quick round of golf in my case).?

What stops us from doing this??Fear!?

Fear that I don’t have time, yet the opposite is true.?The more responsibilities you release (even if you have to take some time to train someone), the more time you will have later.?It is an investment of time that pays back continued dividends.?In my case, I don’t have to do the toilets anymore.?

Fear that I will lose control, yet the opposite is also true . . . you never had control in the first place.?And the harder you try to control, the more you push others away who could lighten your load and make you more successful.?Remember this mantra, “control is the hallmark of managing” and managing is NOT leadership.?Micromanaging is CERTAINLY not leadership, and your employees will hate you for it.?It comes across as a lack of trust to your employees among other things.?You need to lead.?Stop trying to control.??You can never control everything.?In this, you have to be fearless!????

I have worked for several highly entrepreneurial, for-profit companies.?Those who get things done are the ones who are rewarded with more work (and more responsibility).?I have been in organizations with 100+ employees reporting to me.?I can tell you from experience that you MUST have good leaders in roles that support you if you are to be successful.?The larger the organization, the more specialized the roles become just out of need.?

Going back to my days as a minister, in a church of 100, there’s the pastor, and maybe a secretary and possibly a janitor.?Everything else is a matter of who can do what, and the pastor holds twenty titles and puts every single one to use.?In a church of 10,000, there can be as many as one-hundred paid positions (not all full-time), and many of these are specialized roles.?The needs of the church will dictate what becomes specialized.?As an organization grows, it MUST have successful leaders who step into various roles to help it be successful.?That pastor of 100, whose church grows, must give up some of those twenty titles.?These need to go to others, who can bring their own creativity to their new role and change the direction of ministry in ways that the singular pastor could have never imagined.?That happens as one’s own leadership skills are unleashed upon the new role.?Like the Disciples, they will go forth and multiply, bringing their varied talents upon their own new opportunities.?The more clearly defined the role/responsibility is, and the more freedom you give people to work within that role/responsibility, the more pleasantly surprised you will be.

According to organizational experts, employees who feel like they are contributing toward a shared vision for the company are much more productive and driven than any of their counterparts in other organizations.?Through inspiration and purpose, you can unleash your people into roles of leadership from which they will be more productive and driven than if they were just sitting in a pew.??Or in a cubicle.?And the best part is, you won’t have to clean toilets anymore!

The Disciples learned that lesson, too.?And so we read in Acts 6 that they assigned those duties, allowing them to focus on their main mission, which led to greater success.

I mentioned that the Disciples led on two fronts.?The first was in realizing that there was a problem that needed attention, which was diverting their own precious resources from their larger mission.?They delegated (i.e. hired) seven trusted men who would oversee this process.?

The second way in which they led was that those they “hired” were all Hellenistic men to make sure that all the widows with the issues were properly fed and provided. ?We know based upon their given names that they were Hellenistic men, even pointing out that one was a convert to Judaism from Antioch (obviously not a local to Jerusalem, just check a map).?The Disciples could have simply managed this situation and gotten a couple of men to handle the task.?But they also listened to the original problem.?Hellenistic widows were being ignored over Hebraic widows.?They “hired” seven Hellenistic men who would ensure the widows from their “own” group would not be neglected.?That is the difference between managing a problem and leading through a problem.?The Disciples led through this problem by setting up these new leaders for success to meet the problem head-on.

?

Leadership is not about position

In Genesis 37, we learn the story of a young man by the name of Joseph.?His brothers sold him into slavery, which should have been the end of him.?But as a slave, he proved himself and rose within the household of his master.?Then accused of a crime he didn’t commit, he went to jail.?It should have been the last anyone heard of him.?But as a prisoner, he proved himself and rose within the jail under the Warden, so that he was in charge of everyone within the prison.?The story continues, and an opportunity finally brings him before Pharaoh (after several years of being in prison), where he is promoted to just under Pharaoh himself.?We know of the story of Joseph in the scriptures, not because he was a slave or a prisoner, but because he enabled Egypt to survive a severe famine that lasted seven years, which in turn allowed him to save his own family as well.?

The point that applies here is that he chose to act the part of a leader when he was a slave.?And he was promoted.?He acted the part of a leader when he was a prisoner.?And he was promoted.?When he became a leader in Egypt, he was already prepared by his past experience to be a successful leader.?He didn’t become a successful leader because of luck or circumstances.?He was a successful leader before he was a leader by learning to lead one person, himself.?

Leadership is NOT about the position.?If your position defines you, even when you start out at the bottom, if/when you do advance into new positions and roles, you will continue to be defined by those roles and positions.?

Or are you defining your role??How are you allowing your work to bleed over into other/new areas??Areas that allow you to grow in knowledge and wisdom (that old chestnut we tend to downplay in modern business, but is the one thing that keeps you from repeating past mistakes).?What is the need around you that you can fulfill beyond your own set tasks (note: please ensure that your own set tasks are completed first)??And how are you exceeding the expectations for those above you and those who report to you??Most important, how are you exceeding your own expectations and abilities??That is what defining your position/role is all about . . . Joseph was more than his position.?He was a slave but didn’t act the part.?He was a prisoner but didn’t act the part.?Are you more than your position and/or role?

Leadership is NOT . . .

???????????In addition to the above points made, there are several other points that leadership is not:

Leadership is not following, though a good leader knows how to be a great follower (Matt 8:5-13).

Leadership is not saying “Yes” to everything, a good leader knows how to say “no” (Matt 11:20-24).

Leadership is not about avoiding conflict at all costs, a good leader will use or allow conflict to bring about a better outcome (Matt 18:15-17).

In summary, by focusing upon what leadership is not, we can see what leadership is as well.?It is about leaders aligning themselves with those they lead.?It is about delegation (sharing that leadership burden).?It is about setting goals and expectations (ownership) and exceeding them.?It is about learning and personal growth (we make lots of mistakes that requires self-correction).?It includes inspiring others with purpose.?It is about achieving our set goals.?

These aren’t traits or abilities that some people have that others don’t.??Nothing written here has referenced visionary traits, or creativity, or emotional intelligence or a genius intellect or anything else with which you did (or didn’t) have at birth. ?That is why we have so many different types of people who succeed in leadership.?If anything, it doesn’t start with a trait or ability, it starts with an attitude of being willing.?The old adage that you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink is just as true in regards to leadership.?Leaders are people who are willing.?Because they are willing, they take the time to learn.?Because they are willing, thus they grow.?Because they are willing, so they are able to flex and bend as needed to accomplish their task.?And they are willing, thus they inspire and share it with others.?That is what leadership is.

Disclaimer: Unfortunately, Linkedin does not allow me to separate my company name or title from this article.?Please note that all opinions expressed by me are solely my own opinions, and as such do not reflect the opinions of my employer or role I have there.?