There are a variety of authors mentioned in this first section of the book and their views on leadership vary greatly. Tao Te Ching is the first author mentioned and the following passage really struck a chord with me:
In dwelling, be close to the land.
In medication, go deep in the heart.
In dealing with others, be gentle and kind.
In speech, be true.
In ruling, be just.
In business, be competent.
In action, watch the timing.
Kellerman goes on to discuss the value of inaction when serving as a leader. Sometimes doing nothing can be more powerful and meaningful then taking action. When is it appropriate to consider not taking action when you are a leader? Do you leave too much up to chance?
The next great author is Confucius. His work is based on leadership through education and the possibility of learning to be a good leader while leading a life of virtue. Do you think good leaders or born or made? Does a good leader require a genetic "x factor" or can they develop into a charismatic transformational leader through hard work? Do you think being an ethical person is a prerequisite to being a good leader or is breaking the rules a necessary evil to successful leadership?
Plato is a well known philosopher and has numerous writings about leadership. In the excerpt included by Kellerman, he discusses the importance of leadership education: literature, music, physical exercise, elementary and advanced mathematics, philosophy and metaphysics, and real-world experience in civil service and the military. Do you think leadership education is this formulaic or is the St. Norbert approach to the leadership minor more practical? Some of these courses sound like a college education, but will they really prepare someone of a life of leadership? What courses would you add to Plato's school schedule?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I feel the statement that best describes what Lao Tse was saying is that "doing nothing, achieves everything." As a leader it is important to know when to be pensive and let events unfold. I would agree with Zach in saying that choosing to take no action is indeed an action. It allows for the talents of those around you to be developed or perhaps a new opportunity to present itself. What I felt most important of of this section was being able to find balance between being active or passive. I think depending on the circumstance it can be more effective than immediately jumping into action. In situations with time constraints it may not be the most effective philosophy but may prevent detrimental ramifications if used effectively.
ReplyDeleteI personally think that good leaders are made. It all depends on how a person uses and develops the talents that they have. I think that some skills are more difficult to acquire than others but with hard work and determination these skills can be improved. I would say that being ethical and following the rules and not necessary in being a good leader. Many of the most memorable leaders went against these principals at some point. I think the most important thing to take away from this is that they stood behind what they believed in, and that to me is a defining characteristic of a good leader.
I think that at St. Norbert leadership education seems to be more practical and associated with entrepreneurship. I think that both rubrics follow a similar set of skills but there is no one correct path towards leadership. Even represented in our own class there are several different majors present. I think that the main thing that prepares someone for leadership is experience and willingness to learn. The two schedules are very comparable so Im not sure that I would add anything.
I also agree that taking no action is, in itself, an action. I believe that taking no action will send a message to those who look up to you, and that if one decides to not take action, they should be willing to fully explain and support their actions (or lack thereof). It may be appropriate in some situations, but it is also important to explain why you are taking no action, to continue to teach others.
ReplyDeleteThe battle between is a leader made or born seems to align with that of nature versus nurture. I think it is possible that some people are born leaders. I feel that there may be some chemical balance in the brain that gives different people different tendencies. With that said, however, I also believe that leaders can be made. Whether born with the "leader gene" or not, the person still needs to develop that trait, and learn more about the type of leader that they would like to be. This is were being ethical comes to play. I think while developing the self, one determines what being ethical means to them, and it shapes the person into the leader they want to be.
I agree that experience is key in preparing one for leadership. From the classes I have taken, the "doing" aspect of the class is where I believe I learned the most; however, having a well rounded education will also further develop a person as a leader. I think Plato's approach is great, but I like SNC's focus on learning while doing, since it gives us first hand experience for the future.
Doing nothing is an action – a powerful one! Some leaders are too quick to jump to conclusions and just say or do the first thing that comes to their mind, doing nothing usually is over looked. By doing nothing a leader could be making a stronger point. Sometimes people say too much and don’t know when to stop; doing nothing takes patience and may be hard but can lead to a greater good. My example may be lame but take Gandhi for instance. He was a leader of non violence and in a sense “did nothing” by not engaging in any physical violence. People realized that his actions and “nothingness” made sense and worked. He began to gain a following back then and in modern day is now seen as a great philosopher. By doing nothing you do take a chance and you have to be willing to weigh your pros and cons.
ReplyDeleteI think that leaders are both born and made. You can tell that some people are going to be natural leaders at a young age – they are outgoing, courageous, and great communicators. Then there are those that are developed over time. Some people seem shy or quiet but they are just taking in their surroundings and listening. Good leadership does not only take good communication but also great listening skills. Leadership skills can be gained over time with the proper education and experience. I think that all leaders have the moral obligation to be ethical role models for all. If a leader does not act ethical then the people they are leading will do the same.
St. Norbert does a great job of giving all students a solid liberal arts education as well as practical application. If I had to choose I think that the leadership minor program here at the school better prepares students to enter the working world whereas Plato’s method prepares for better intellectual leadership experience. It is important for students to be able to go through the different core leadership minor classes and learn how they can incorporate the teaching into their everyday experiences. If I had to add to Plato’s list I think it is important to have some knowledge in art history.
I agree with everyone else that not taking action is still an action. However, there are definitely times when a leader must step aside and let other people take control. In college this happens a lot, especially as we reach graduation and seniors move on to "the real world." There comes a point where the the younger members of a group or team must start to step up to leadership positions for when graduation comes and the seniors leave.
ReplyDeleteWith regards to the debate between leaders being born or made, I am slightly on the fence. I believe that any person can become a leader with the right experiences and training. However, I also feel that some people are just born better leaders than others. In my opinion, these genetics just make it "easier" to lead; leadership can just be an instinct to some people. To be the best possible leader, I there there needs to be a combination of genetics and training. In a perfect world, all leaders would act completely moral but sadly this is not the case. I think a leader's intentions and goals are the major factors that determine his/her morality. Depending on the goal should determine if the leader should act moral or cheat in order to fulfill the means.
I think the most important aspect of perfecting leadership ability is through hands on experience. I like that the leadership minor has direct application and works with strengthening leadership outside of the classroom. It's one thing to learn about the theories about what leadership is "supposed" to be but it's a completely different thing to put that theory into action. Application to the real world is absolutely essential. Plato's suggestions for leadership can be beneficial but it is better to actually put them to use.
I may sound like a broken record, but I completely agree with everyone when I say that taking no action is in fact an action itself. There are both pros and cons when taking action to a situation. An example of this is when friends work together on a group project. It is usually difficult to step up to your friend if you see that they are doing something in the wrong direction or not doing anything at all. By stepping up and confronting you friend – you risk the chance of upsetting the friend which would likely cause tension in the entire group. Not stepping up causes everyone, including your grade, to suffer and that’s not necessary.
ReplyDeleteI used to believe leaders were born, but I have learned quickly that one can form into a leader over time. I believe having personality traits that would involve charisma and being outgoing would help the potential leader – but it won’t make or break him/her. As for being ethical – it depends on your personal morals. If you truly feel that you need to break rules to get ahead and don’t feel shame for it … I suppose go for it. I, personally, feel ashamed and like a cheat if I don’t go about things in an ethical way. But, once again, it has to do with how one is raised. My parents have always been very stern about being honest and treating everyone fairly – karma comes back and bites you in the butt.
I have always been very pleased with SNC’s approach to the leadership minor. Students are in an assortment of classes that can help you in more than just completing your LEAD minor. For example, I took a Business & Professional Speaking course to fulfill a credit of my LEAD minor. I’ve always been somewhat confident talking in front of people about everyday stuff– but speeches? Oh, no way. This definitely pushed me out of my comfort zone and I had to learn how to feel confident with rehearsed material. Classes such as Professional Speaking will inevitably help a person in their future endeavors. Regardless if you feel the class to be painful and excruciating – it’s worth it in the long run. If I were to add to Plato’s list, I would add a Speech class. It teaches people poise and professionalism along with hopefully boosting their self-confidence.
Choosing not to take an action should be considered an option when actually doing something (queue repeat of everyone else as well) other than "not taking action" will do more harm than good. I say this more from a potential example from a leader who always finds something to do. This leader might have the foresight to almost back off of an issue rather than stretch it out and upset the one they are working with. This of course is more of an extreme case, and I don't see this happening on a regular basis.
ReplyDeleteEveryone can be a leader. It is funny that this is brought up now because when I went home last night, I had a piece of mail from my Boy Scouts Council saying "true leaders aren't born, they are made through the Boy Scouts". Obviously this isn't the ONLY avenue for people to become leaders. I don't think there is a needed quality for a leader. This is proven by the Myers Briggs test. Everyone will fit into that test somehow. Even if you are a quieter person, you will have a place on that scale. Ethics guide one's leadership. However, what we think is ethical, others may not. On the same side, what other's think is ethical, we do not. As an extreme example, Hitler thought that what he was doing was the right thing (and he got massive legions of Germans to follow him), while the rest of the world was repulsed at his action.
To me, Plato's only section that would make the most sense to me in terms of leadership is the real world experience. You cannot argue against that and the fact that nothing beats real world experience. the only other one that would be a close second to me is philosophy, but even then, that wouldn't do nearly as much for personal development if anything at all. Unfortunately, while our class is diverse, there are certain majors where it seems impractical to pair with a Leadership minor. I chose this minor because I have background in leadership, but I also think that it goes extremely well with Human Resource Management rather than a Religious Studies minor (unless I was going into a Parish). You don't need math to be a leader, you need the ability to work with others. It seems as if Plato was more focused on the skills of everyday life, whereas I think any class in our minor would be perfect for his development as a leader.
I think it is a good time to not take action when being leader when there is a bigger picture. For example, when a leader forms a plan that will take a longer duration of time to see the ending or the final vision, then I believe over that time a leader might need to step back. An example of this would be with the Packers defense. When Dom Capers came in to change the defense it was a little rocky at first. People criticized but he stepped back and let his system work. If he would have changed the original plan just because times were rough, then it would not have successfully developed to what it is today.
ReplyDeleteI believe that good leaders can be born. Some people are just born with that X factor that makes them able to lead people. However, I believe that great leaders are made. They need to be developed. Whether that is with learning how lead or slowly overtime developing, I think that there needs to be an effort and a drive to become a great leader.
As for Plato's writing on leadership, I like the SNC model when acquiring a minor. I think that it should not be a formula to learn leadership. I think that overtime, and practically every day leadership changes. However, if I had to had a course to Plato, I would add communication, ideally an interpersonal communication class. For example, leaders need to know how to communicate. No matter what the situation is, a leader needs to know how to speak with the followers, or not speak in that matter. There needs to be an understanding between what the leader wants from his followers but also what the followers and looking for in their leader so the leader also needs to know how to listen.
I absolutely think a good leader must understand the balance between action and inaction. Take this simple example. In the workplace, to colleagues begin to argue about an issue in the office. The leader, or supervisor at the front of the room, clearly believes that person X is correct in his line of arguments. The leader has two choices. First, s/he can step in, stop the dialogue, and conclude that person X is correct and move on. Or, s/he can do nothing, but sit and listen to the conversation unfold. By allowing the two subordinates to complete their dialogue, subject Y is persuaded by subject X’s argument, and a resolution is formed. The forming of this resolution by the two subordinates instills a sense of accomplishment and collaboration among the two. Had the leader stepped in, the two would have had no place in the decision-making. I believe it is important to know when to engage, and when to take a step back and allow events to unfold as they will. You can always choose to take action at a later time, but no one person has all the solutions and by leaving things to chance, we open our minds to possibilities we may not have otherwise encountered.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do not believe in the “great man theory,” I do believe that there are some characteristics that predispose some people to be more effective leaders than others. I believe that to be a good leader you must be attuned to the needs of people, and how the human mind desires and fulfils these needs. A basic understanding of human psychology and community is essential, in my opinion, to be a truly effective leader. Specifically addressing ethicality of leadership, I believe that leadership in its most simple sense (that is one person motivating another) does not require ethicality. With this, if you are discussing leadership by way of social change, ethics play a huge role. An example from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, would tell us that we are only responsible for following just laws and rules, and that it is our moral duty to break those that are unjust. In considering this, following the rules is not always necessary, however ethical leadership would not allow us to break rules that are based on morality and the greater good.
As I discussed in the previous paragraph, I believe that at least a basic understanding of human psychology and sociology (or human interaction) is essential to leadership. To effectively persuade, motivate, and initiate change among a group of people, you must first be able to identify the source of their needs, their motive for attaining their desires, and the strategies they may employ to achieve a desired end. This knowledge is rooted in a basic understanding of the human mind and thus, I believe these additional courses are essential to leadership.
I have often thought about whether or not one should act or be inactive in certain situations. I am always confronted at the circumstance in that I like to be in control and being passive and letting events unfold in front of me is often difficult. I get anxious trying to put my word or stamp on a given situation and yet, I do see its effectiveness by allowing opportunities to present them slowly. I do not strongly advise leaders to take this position on many circumstances however, because the truly effective leader is not judged on their in activity but their actions in difficult matters. In my opinion leaving it up to chance doesn’t always cut it.
ReplyDeleteI think in today’s modern society a leader can be groomed and educated to become a leader. Granted, charisma and assertiveness are often personal characteristics that leaders utilize to gain support and followers to their cause or decisions, but hard work, determination and ethical responsibility in a leadership role will garner a strong and effective leader.
Plato is one of my favorite philosophers. His ideas to create strong leaders for the state is quite strange, but seemingly effective. His leaders or Philosopher-kings are educated to become thinking people of action is a nice basis for the outcome he wishes his leaders will respond to. The education that Plato advocates for however does not meet my exact idea of an ideal situation. In Plato’s “leadership education” he asks that most of the major works are censored to avoid the ambiguous emotions that may be discussed n famous Greek works like those of Homer. I think that The St. Norbert approach of leadership is far more practical for the outcomes our leadership minors wish to achieve. Plato’s education plan is designed to make those leaders citizens loyal to the state, whereas our approach is to give us the tools to become effective leaders in an array of educational backgrounds
I agree with a lot of the previous posts in that inaction is in itself an action. Doing nothing in a leadership situation may leave too much up to chance, but it could also have positive ends. For example, a group may feel like they have more freedom to come up with their own ideas and execute actions in a unique way compared to how things were done in the past, in a situation where the leader is not doing anything.
ReplyDeleteI believe successful leaders are a combination of being born and made. Some characteristics of personality, such as introversion and extroversion may be linked to genetics, and it is obvious that an extrovert may have an easier time making themselves known as a leader. Introverts may be too softspoken, or concentrated on thinking about what they want to say before acting, that they miss out on leadership opportunities. On the other hand, I believe it is possible for an introvert to become a leader through training and proper development of leadership skills. I think being ethical is necessary to being a successful leader because followers are necessary to leaders and followers will more likely follow someone who has morals or values parallel to what they believe.
Out of Platos ideas for what a leader should do, I really like his idea of real world experience such as in civil service or the military. I believe this coincides with the "Leadership in Action" section of the minor. The best way I have learned to develop my leadership skills is through actual experience in group projects and various organizations. On the other hand, I do not believe a person needs to be educated in math, metaphysics, music, and physical exercise. It would be beneficial to have a well-rounded leader, who is knowledgeable about many subjects, but an advanced education in any of these subjects is not needed. The philosophy part of Plato's education recommendations goes along with the Ethics part of the LEAD minor because it is important to be ethical and to think about tough ethical choices in training to be an effective leader. Courses I would add to Plato's schedule include courses in interpersonal communication and public speaking in order to learn how to most effectively communicate with group members and be best understood. Another subject that should be studied is a basic understanding of how people learn, think, and develop. This could be possible by taking a Human Development or Psychology class.
I think that doing nothing can be a possible decision to make, but even inaction makes a point, makes you take a stand. I think it can be appropriate, although to think of an exact time when it would be appropriate is difficult. We always feel like we HAVE to do something, but sometimes its better to just watch and see what happens. When I was at LeaderShape this past summer, a common phrase was "trust the process" and I know that the facilitators sometimes had problems doing so, but it worked out. They trusted that what they were doing would work out and did not stray from what they had planned. You are definitely taking a risk when you chose to not act, but you are also taking chances when you decide to act. I don't think it really is such a hugely different idea- as Americans we just have a hard time accepting it.
ReplyDeleteI think good leaders can be made. We become good leaders by learning and studying. I think that some people are naturally born with characteristics that would make them a good leader, but those skills and characteristics must be honed. I think charismatic leaders are a special type of leaders. It is something that you can't necessarily learn how to do. However, I do believe that you will become a charismatic leader when you are leading about things you deeply care about and are interested in. As far as ethics, I believe that having a strong set of morals and ethical ideas develop as you become a better leader. It's not that you have all your morals and values before you are a leader, but you grow them out of being a leader and having experiences.
I don't think there is a strict formula to teaching leadership. As we talked about in class, the minor spans across different areas because leadership does not only affect those who think about and work with leadership, but it affects everywhere you work, no matter which department or work field you go into. I think that the SNC minor is a great way to learn about leadership, but an even better course would include practice, or practicum work in leadership. I think that may be something interesting to add to Plato's work. We can't just sit and learn about leadership. We need to practice and experience leadership.