The obvious answer is no but the more specific question I had was, ‘Is leadership needed in all business or political positions In which there are people under you?’ This question came to me due to recent political elections in my local area in which we had three candidates running for mayor.
I personally know one of the three, while the other two I had not had more than a couple of brief conversations with. Long story short, one of the gentlemen I do not know terribly well (who was also the incumbent) won the election. To be honest I was blown away that he won. He has a great reputation for being a volunteer, previous small business owner locally, etc…but having seen him at Chamber Mixers, city council meetings, and other events (whether he is walking around or up in front speaking); the man has no passion, no energy, no excitement in his voice, no morale building skills that I have seen yet.
This was where my shock came from. Don’t you want your political leaders, from mayor to president, to be energized, motivating people that can bring people together in good times and bad? This man seems like a very nice person, but sometimes nice people should not be in charge of the megaphone. Nice is not enough to fill the role of a leader, is it? I know my answer to this but I wonder why so many other people are willing to put someone in a position of power that is not oozing and overflowing with energy and excitement.
Great observation Matt. I work at a national chain of neighbor supermarkets and I see this all the time, People are put into a position of leadership because of their lets say ‘brown stained sniffers’ and not their ability to lead and motivate a crew of diverse and unique individuals. It appears there is a sense of entitlement after so many years of being in the same position of leadership and this shouldn’t be the case. We need leaders who lead, motivate, and spur the public to make society a better place for all
Thanks Loshel, I appreciate the feedback. I agree with you comlpetely. Not everyone is meant to lead, but some positions in life require leadership. The problem is that leadership is something you have the knack for or you don’t. Someone with time under their belt doesn’t mean they have the right qualities to lead a diverse group of people. Rock on brother, have a great day!!
I am in 100% agreement. I can’t believe they elected the incumbant again. MG would have been a perfect Mayor in the area. He had passion, vision, and true leadership.
It is shame!
Thanks, I appreciate the comment. In these times it is important to have someone in charge, be it at a business or in politics, that can keep people motivated and moving forward…I guess we’ll see what happens but thus far I’m not impressed. Thanks again.
Matt, of all people I know from Twitter I would expect you to understand that things are not always as they seem. First of all you say your new Mayor was a volunteer. It’s a position to get to know people and have people get to know you one on one. Then you say he was a small business owner. Did he have employees? Did he treat them well? Perhaps he had a very loyal customer base because he understood what his customers wanted. And perhaps he managed to find out who and what make your area politics tick and can make those movers and shakers (?) feel comfortable when having to deal with him through all of those previous things he has been a part of. Politics is not an easy game to play, even at the grassroots level. A hyper fully energized guy -physically- may shake hands heartily and even speak well before groups, but it doesn’t mean he is any more of a leader than the one who doesn’t and isn’t. Your Mayor just may know what to do to gain people’s trust (well that’s already kind of obvious as he was elected) and if you go out of your way to get to know him you may see what your neighbors saw. And if you don’t, I say run against him. You have the ability to do both. Seize the moment my friend.
I appreciate your message Cheri and do agree with some of it. I’ve been in this area long enough and know enough people (and history) to know how things work here. The reason he was elected was several reasons, some of which you got right…other reasons were that of money and he apparently (nobody disagreed) had some long time “deep pockets” on his side. If you go back through city council voting, etc., he doesn’t seem to be in favor of some things (like development) which we need in order to help fight the bad economy.
In addition, regardless of what anyone tells me…there needs to be a passion, an exuberance, a motivation to collaborate and energize a city that is being allowed to sleep right now…whether silent but obvious or outwardly obvious…he has neither. So, I do hear you, but I have not heard anyone, even his supporters, accuse him of being vibrant and energetic.
Leaders come in all shapes and sizes for sure. You are right, that the great communicators are usually the ones that “move” up on the influencing ladder -would rather be involved with ppl who are charismatic, inspiring. I have also watched very charismatic ppl miss in the substance department. At this point, I try to look for what value they bring, not judge what they’re not & see if there are other ways to moving ppl that I hadn’t considered.
That said, you’ll see ppl who are creative, interesting, lively, authentic & inspiring in my immediate circle! Others are more likely to get supported by me when they fit my own set of “what I love about you”
Hi Sandra, thanks for your thughts. I definitely agree that there have probably been leaders who were motivating yet lacked substance. I wonder sometimes if a motivator would be better in that they could motivate the masses to “do work” and get things done, where as, a leader with no charisma but possibly have the substance would do what?
I, in now way think I’m right, but from my life experience, the ability to promote and motivate the people around you has had more results then being the smartest guy in the room. The discussion on leadership is awesome…love Peter Drucker on that topic. Thanks again!!