WHAT MAKES A GOOD
LEADER?
July 22, 2018
Eyebrows were raised when US Press Secretary Sarah Sanders
disclosed last week that President Trump had directed White House to extend an
invitation to his Russian counterpart, President Putin, to visit Washington later
this year. Close on the heels of Summit in Helsinki, such news was bound to
gain a lot of media attention, particularly after a little controversy
concerning the alleged Russian meddling in US Presidential polls. While there
would be several geopolitical implications of such ongoing summit between the
two leaders and many experts may have different interpretations of the dynamics
of the entire exercise, in terms of “leadership”, there is no doubt that it
must be one of the boldest gambits. If these summits build a momentum of their
own and do succeed in building a friendly relation between the two countries
over the next few decades or even thawing their strained bilateral relations,
there would be a directional shift in global politics.
America’s main worry today has been the rising economic and
political clout of China. The United States cannot afford to fritter away its
energies on conflicts and rivalries that can otherwise be tackled with little
extra effort or a victory in these shall make no big difference. If President
Trump succeeds in winning over Russia or even containing the threat from
Russia, it would be one of the most remarkable accomplishments of his time. I
was recently interacting with a UK based observer of US foreign policy and he
opined that the best strategy would be 'to look forward without getting bogged
down by the past. Even if there are heavy baggage and serious misgivings and
distrust in the West’s relations with Russia, the adversarial relationship does
not suit at least the American interests at this juncture.’ He described that
what President Trump is trying amounts to ‘winning over Russia without
defeating it.’ If we win over our adversaries or neutralise even potential
foes, we reduce the threat to ourselves, which automatically enhances our
strength.
We assess the quality of leadership of any great leader not by
one or two moves but by the overall impact that they can leave. I recall early
last year, many people were concerned at a somewhat disruptive approach of the
leadership of Head of the Government of the world’s most powerful nation. One
of the former Directors of IIM, who is probably one of the most eminent global
experts from India on leadership, remarked in course of a casual chat that “in
the past half a century, the world had not witnessed such an acute crisis of
leadership in virtually most fields.” He wondered whether the systems had
‘saturated so much that it struggled to throw up high-quality leaders.’
Leadership is a crucial ingredient for the success of democracy
and its ability to produce good quality leaders shall determine its eventual
fate. So, who is a good leader?
Good Leaders are Easy to Identify
Good leaders are easy to identify but difficult to describe. In
fact, ‘who is a good leader’ or ‘what makes a leader good’, maybe fairly
contested ideas. Every leader is not endowed with the same level of skills or
strengths. There is a large spectrum, varying from average to great or
exceptional, on which we can classify leaders. Average leaders may succeed in
certain circumstances and remain ineffective in the rest, good leaders succeed
in most circumstances and even against several odds and great leaders need a
very wide variety of skills and an exceptional push of both luck and support of
associates to succeed and leave a mark. Great leaders leave a legacy that
inspires people much after they are gone. They set their benchmarks of
excellence which are difficult to match or emulate. They are path-breakers in
the sense that they venture into newer areas and attempt things that are
different.
The word leader or leadership has probably been overused in our
times. We usually consider those individuals as leaders who occupy the highest
rungs in political, professional or social hierarchies. These include institutions,
organisation or communities or even nations or simply those individuals who
command wider acceptability. However, the real test of leadership lies not in
occupying a position at the top of acceptability among but in the quality of
difference that they make to their surroundings and even beyond. Good leaders
make a more positive quality of difference or change, bringing people across
divides and differences together, infusing greater synergy and harmony, even
while opposing entrenched vested interests.
Good leaders transform the quality of output of their people -
both individually and collectively. They show a sense of purpose and direction
that is both appealing and viable. They succeed despite hindrances. They
inspire others through their acts, deeds and performance. They infuse a sense
of higher self-worth among those whom they lead. The biggest success of leaders
would be their ability to win over even their enemies.
Mahatma Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther
King Jr, Napoleon Bonaparte, John Davison Rockefeller, Albert Einstein etc are
some of the greatest leaders in different fields that the world has produced in
recent centuries. None of them was perfect and they all had their share of
flaws but their actions and beliefs did help change the world for better in
some form for the entire humanity.
However, one story from Indian history that is attributed to
ancient Indian King Samudra Gupta is worth narrating even though its details
are inapplicable in the contemporary context. Legend says that Samudra Gupta
was third among the four prince brothers who were contenders for the
responsibility of the Gupta empire that flourished in an era, which is
considered the golden phase in the history of Indian sub-continent. His father
Emperor Chandra Gupta I, who himself was one of the greatest emperors in the
history of mankind, was keen to appoint the most worthy among the four princes
as his successor who could protect the vast empire. All the four princes had to
undergo a series of tests including a sword-fight. They fared almost equally in
all the tests except sword fight, making it difficult to distinguish one from
the other. About Samudra Gupta, the story says that the nimble-footed royal
prince not only fought the duel against a formidable opponent with utmost
skills and dexterity but when the latter lost both balance and sword, failing
to react to a sharp attack from the prince, and fell, the prince promptly threw
his sword and knelt to lift his opponent and embraced him apologetically. The
sword fight was for winning and not killing the opponent. Emperor Chandra
Gupta-I and his associates chose Samudra Gupta on the plea that he would
protect the empire better as he could control his emotions and handle his
opponents without anger and vengeance, despite being powerful. An emperor had
to earn the respect of both his associates and opponents and convert even
enemies into friends. It was more important to win rather than kill and destroy
the opponent- a sentiment that scripted exceptional prosperity and harmony of
ancient India.
Several centuries later, Mahatma Gandhi repeatedly asserted that
he had no enemies and advised his followers to “hate the sin and not the
sinner.” President Lincoln showed remarkable courage to not only forgive his
political opponents but risk his career and even his life to secure liberty and
dignity for “slaves”. Mandela forgave his tormentors and oppressors who had
subjected him to enormous physical and psychological torture and outraged even
his dignity. As the greatest corporate leader and accumulator of wealth in his
lifetime in the entire recorded human history, John Davison Rockefeller
eventually scripted a new chapter of philanthropy that has inspired many of his
ilks much after his death to inspire the "Giving" pledge by corporate
leaders led by Bill Gates and Warren Buffet. As an intellectual leader and
great genius, Eisenstein led the most simple and austere life and showed
remarkable humility, but yet his accomplishments changed the world for better.
Can such people be considered good leaders? They may be
materially successful individuals but irrespective of the political, military
or financial success or clout they may wield, they can never earn respect and
trust, which is the hallmark of good leaders. Leaders build bonds, promote
powerful ideas and establish processes that positively impact most, if not all,
around them. Various means of direct and subtle communications adopted by
leaders are extremely crucial for this purpose.
Observations of great leaders, who have obtained exceptional
results in different contexts, suggest that they have often possessed different
attributes, and at times used contradictory techniques to achieve their goals.
At the same time, most of them had certain common qualities like vision,
courage, ability to energise their teams, and most importantly integrity of
character and purpose. Hence, it would be fair to say that while there can be
no fixed formula or prescription for good leadership but essential attributes
of a good leader transcend time and context. Effectiveness of various tools,
techniques or approaches of leadership varies with context and sub-context but
the key principles remain timeless.
No comments:
Post a Comment