So, someone Twitters a leadership quote by Bennis. I jump into the fray with a leadership quote by Kotter: “No one has yet figured out how to manage people into battle. They must be led.” The first someone Twitters back. She’s not sure that taking people into war should be considered “leadership.” To which I say:
Like hell it shouldn’t.
The point of Kotter’s quote was to highlight that the essence of leadership is to compel someone to do something s/he wouldn’t do on his or her own. To move a person to act in spite of fear, in spite of uncertainty, in spite of self-doubt… ultimately, in spite of him- or herself.
Good leaders point people in a direction and herd them along, using carrots, sticks, and various trade-offs to “motivate” them. Great leaders make people believe in something greater than themselves, truly motivating them by giving them a role to play—and I say this without being flippant—in changing the world.
Good and evil? That’s an entirely separate matter. America’s first and arguably greatest leaders, the Founding Fathers, made a deal with the devil regarding slavery in order to see our nation born. Thomas Jefferson’s morality was and is still hotly debated; his leadership abilities are not. These concepts, while closely linked, are distinct.
If you—like my Twitter pal—want leaders who never go to war, then I’ve got bad news: your world is too simple. Jack Nicholson’s Col. Jessep had it right in A Few Good Men: though he may look grotesque and repulsive, we do need him on that wall. We need leaders who are amoral enough to be willing to sometimes fight for peace, as ridiculous as that sounds. I hope they never need to, but should they be tested, I don’t want them debating the morality of throwing a punch, or throwing a punch too hard. At that moment, I want them to hit hard enough and fast enough to ensure victory at minimum exposure, cost, and risk.
Leadership is not always nice. Now and then, a leader has to step into the funk.
I hope that every leader the world knows from today forward is savvy enough to avoid ever having to fight another battle… ever.
But I also hope that society is wise enough to tease apart the ideas of leadership and morality, and to recognize that great leaders sometimes execute—and execute well—in morally reprehensible situations such as war.
Jason, brilliant. I concur completely that leadership and morality are two different things – else we wouldn’t have Jesus of Nazareth, Adolph Hitler, Jim Jones and Florence Nightengale roaming the same earth. For your Twitter buddy, she should consider the opposite as well – I’m sure we know lots of morally wonderful people who are complete sheep. Ergo…
Anyway, provocative and good thought starter. I know I’m a leader – am I always moral? I’m moral – am I a leader? Hmmm…the two don’t necessarily go together, as a sober and mature look at the world will reveal.
I offer a final tweat to your friend – “who you gonna believe, me or your own eyes?” Vaya con dios, my friend.
Ever since James MacGregor Burns and his book Leadership, there have been folks who want to say that leadership is only leadership if it’s moral. Leadership, like a hammer, is value-neutral. The values and morality come in what you do with it.
Jason, loved your post – it took me back to a time when leadership was more than a buzzword in a book or chat room. As extreme as this sounds, my guess is that whoever is questioning whether leading men into battle is true “leadership” probably has never taken fire from an enemy trying to kill them. They’ve probably never been pinned down in a firefight that they might not make it out of, because I can assure you that these things so-oft platitudes start to matter after this kind of experience. The fact that they’re ‘tweeting’ on the legitimacy of battle leadership is unfathomable to me.
” . . . You don’t want the truth because deep down, in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall.
We use words like “honor”, “code”, “loyalty”. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line.
I have neither the time, nor the inclination, to explain myself to man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide . . . and then questions the manner in which I provide it.”
The beauty of a democracy is that things can be questioned openly, and ultimately society benefits . . . but for someone to question whether leadership in battle is ‘real’ is utterly incomprehensible to me. This is a person I’d like to sit down and have a cup of coffee with, and explain to them my personal experiences even before 9/11 (when it wasn’t popular and frankly, operations in terrorist hotspots around the globe were classified). Then I’d like to take them on a tour of the VA Hospital and let them shake hands with so many of our disabled veterans, some of which are missing limbs, but made it home alive due to ‘leadership’ and uncommon valor.
Perhaps they could tweet out their epiphany while in the midst of true ‘leadership’.