There are innumerable words written in journals, books and periodicals on the topic of leadership.  Strong and effective leadership appears to be elusive as many of our experiences bear testimony to leadership that is weak or ineffectual in a variety of arenas such as businesses, organizations, teams or institutions.  Leadership can be transformative but often is not, and perhaps more often than studies of successful leadership, we spend time on autopsies of failed leadership.    There are many different styles of leadership and much research has been done in the area with varied results and lingering questions.  If we look in the realm of sports, many of these questions can be illustrated.  Why is one team successful when another is not?  Or why does one particular program have more of a successful track record while another has a reputation for losing?  Or why does a team appear to have more talent amongst their members while an “underdog” pulls off the upset and wins a particular contest when the so-called experts had counted them out?  Does success come down to leadership?  If so, why do some leaders experience success and then go to a new venture and find it difficult to replicate the same outcomes?  Are there too many outside factors and considerations that affect results and therefore certain teams, businesses, industries, organizations or schools have too many insurmountable odds to withstand?

There are multiple styles of leadership across a spectrum that includes autocratic, democratic, authentic, instructional, transactional and transformational to name a few.  These are influenced by contextual factors such as work environment, organizational mission and numerous cultural factors. For example, would the leadership approach taken by a military commander in a war zone be the same as one for the head of a non-profit working with volunteers?  Besides leadership style, there is also much research focused on leadership tasks or the “work” of leaders.  What do leaders do and then by implication, how successfully or effectively do they “do” that work?  Among many other tasks, effective leaders cast a vision, set goals and action plans, communicate, build relationships, motivate, monitor progress, provide feedback, create teams and manage tasks and resources.  But which of these tasks is most important in achieving successful outcomes?  How do leaders accomplish their objectives?  What is the true nature of the work of the leader? Followers may be inspired by a rousing speech that casts the challenge or vision in the light of a worthy endeavor, but how then is the work actually carried forth?  What does the leader do to make the vision a reality?  What does the leader do if the vision seems too unrealistic, lofty or beyond the resources available?  How is that information or insight gathered by the leader and then taken into consideration when undertaking action steps?  These questions give pause due to what is unknown about leadership.

I want to spend some time reflecting on what is known and what is needed to develop effective leadership. The effectiveness needs to be present for the individual leader, for the group being led and for the building of leadership capacity.  The goal of a leader in many respects should be to work themselves out of a job.  In other words, the best leaders create capacity among group members to accomplish a task, perhaps even an audacious goal, and then the members look around and remark, “Look what WE did!”  This means that the leader needs to possess and cultivate certain attitudes and behaviors within themself and then within the group.  In future posts, I will examine some of these attitudes and behaviors including what it looks and sounds like within the group as well as the implications of not developing these attitudes and behaviors.  For now, I’ll leave this as a reflection point for you (and me) as we consider together what attitudes and behaviors are needed to effectively lead those around you.  I hope you’ll join in the journey and the conversation.