There is no shortage of academic research on leadership. Practically all business and management students are exposed to theoretical analysis of what it takes to be a good leader in a large business or political organisation.
Still, many argue that today the world is leaderless. This makes people scared. Why is the world missing great political leaders like Nelson Mandela and Mahatma Gandhi, or remarkable business leaders like Henry Ford and Walt Disney?
Leadership breakthroughs are rare and, when they occur, are the product of more than one person, one speech, one institution or even one era. The exercise of leadership is complex and often full of contradictions and paradoxes. Many polls in different countries show that most people have little faith in their political and business leaders.
Trust in the political system has probably declined in recent years because of new technologies and investigative reporting techniques that make it harder for rogue political and business leaders to hide their misdeeds. Trust cannot be enforced on the public by legislation any more than one can regulate or instil authenticity in leaders.
One glaring paradox today is that many still believe that representative democracy is the best system of government. Still, at the same time, many are sceptical, if not cynical, about political leaders. Politicians are pilloried when they make U-turns, often labelled as ‘flip-flopping’
Yet flip-flopping is sometimes desirable and often even necessary. Times change. People learn new things. Pragmatism is a virtue in politics as much as in business. Yet the media reflects the prevailing public sentiments when they get tough on cautious politicians who do not speak assertively and consistently about what should be done.
Defining outstanding leadership is a complex exercise.
To most people, a ‘leader’ is someone who has power – a head of state, an army or a major corporation.
These characteristics are more apt to define a ‘ruler’. Rulers know how to gain power and use this power to force things to happen. History gives us many examples of rulers, including Peter the Great and also Abraham Lincoln, but also Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin.
Leadership breakthroughs are rare and, when they occur, are the product of more than one person, one speech, one institution or even one era
Business leaders are often better described as “managers”. They know how to organise things, keep the machinery of their organisation humming, pay attention to details, and delegate responsibility. Lee Iacocca and Eleanor Roosevelt were good ‘managers’ Ronald Reagan was undoubtedly not a good manager as he tripled the national debt. Moreover, many of the people he hired lacked competence and integrity; either he did not care or did not notice.
Another definition of a ‘leader’ is someone others follow not by force but voluntarily. Such people often have charm, charisma, fascination, and credibility. Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King certainly had these characteristics.
A label often associated with great leaders is that of ‘visionary’ – someone who does more than perpetuate the status quo and can articulate a goal so correctly that people create it as a reality. Martin Luther King was a ‘visionary’. He moved the US with his vision so eloquently articulated when he said: “My four little children will one day not be judged by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character”.
A great leader also needs to be a ‘savant’ – a well-informed and knowledgeable person who does not live in a simplified dream world but understands the complexity and variety of the real world.
It is difficult to find a person with all these leadership characteristics. A great leader is not a creature of a political party or a fabrication of an election campaign.
Many want to vote for someone who wants to win to serve the people and the nation, not one who wants to win in order to win. They want leaders who can see beyond statistics and identify with homemakers, farmers, those struggling with illness, small businesses, the unemployed and the poor as real people, not voting blocks. We also expect leaders to treasure the environment and the country’s resources ‒ the soil, the water, the air, the human beings, and especially the children.
There is no person with all these qualities. If such a person existed, the mechanisms of modern political parties would probably eliminate him. And if, by chance, such leadership candidates did make it to the ballot paper, they would not be elected.
Mandela and Gandhi were not politicians. They were leaders. They encouraged informed followers instead of supporters; they set long-term ethical agendas. They had a universally conceived humanity that connected with the suffering of others.