Latest Blog Submissions
Posted by
Tom Dallessio
on 19-Apr-2010
Congressman Bob Franks was a friend of Leadership New Jersey. He believed in our mission, vision and values. He supported our efforts to educate, empower and engage leaders to improve the quality of life for all in New Jersey. And, he took the time and effort to ensure that Fellows understood the value and importance of public service.
In remembering Congressman Franks, LNJ was proud to have him provide the keynote address at the 2008 Forum on the Future of New Jersey. "Clean Slate, Fresh Start: A 21st Century Model of Governance in New Jersey" brought over 70 opinion leaders from the public, private and nonprofit sectors to contemplate ways to improve our governance. Congressman Franks, the President of the Health Care Institute of New Jersey and a former government official who cared deeply about the future of our state, gave a number of recommendations worth considering.
In particular, he recommended a full-time legislature, where outside employment would be restricted and post-term lobbying would be banned. Electing a Comptroller and a public vote on tenure for Supreme Court justices were also in the mix. And, he called for competitive Assembly districts that would be distinct from Senate districts and sole membership to allow for greater diversity and opinion in the Legislature.
I encourage all Fellows to read the summary of the 2008 Forum on the Future of New Jersey (http://leadershipnj.org/files/ffnj2008_summary.pdf) and view the podcast to see Bob in action: http://leadershipnj.org/ffnj2008.html#pods (go to video #1 and watch from 17:00 to 43:30).
Congressman Franks left us a tremendous legacy and much unfinished business. No finer tribute to this good man would be to see a number of his recommendations to fruition. His death was untimely, but he remains with us in our charge to improve the quality of life for all in the Garden State.
Yours in Fellowship,
Tom Dallessio, LNJ '98
Executive Director
Posted by
Luis Diaz
on 18-Jan-2010
"There are many persons that claim to be leaders due to position, rank, title, pedigree or in some cases a self-annointed status. Leadership is an abstract term that has been defined in different ways throughout history. From the Machiavellian conception of the ‘prudent prince’ to more contemporary definitions of leadership in the context of business, leadership means different things to different people. In order to define what it means to be an effective leader ("True Leadership"), however, we need to analyze the prerequisites to leadership, identify the qualities that make a good leader, explain why these qualities are made rather than born, and highlight the interplay between effectiveness and morality. In doing so, it is helpful to review and use the perspectives of Immanuel Kant, Josiah Royce, Niccolò Machiavelli, and Ralph Stogdill to craft an accurate definition of True Leadership: leadership is the ability to inspire others and to align their competing interests to achieve a common goal.
As famously stated by the United States’ sixth President, John Quincy Adams, “if your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more and become more, you are a leader” (Lewis, 1). This quote, although simplified, points to a fundamental necessity underlying True Leadership—the ability to inspire others. However, before one can inspire others, a necessary perquisite is that the person has a vision to which he or she is striving to achieve. In other words, consistent with the views of American philosopher Josiah Royce in his Philosophy of Loyalty, a leader must first have a “cause to which [he or she] is loyal to” (Royce, 23). The identification of a worthy cause often requires the leader to engage in a meaningful, often painful, process of self-analysis and soul searching. The by-product of this soul-searching is the identification of one or more issues that spark true passion and commitment on the part of the leader.
Not only must a leader find such a worthy cause, but he or she must also do so with good intentions. Those who choose goals that are selfish, such as the maximization of personal power, or that involve unethical or evil actions such a the killing of others, are not considered true leaders. History is full of persons like Hitler, Stalin and others that used leadership skills for self-serving purposes or to bring ruin to others. According to German philosopher Immanuel Kant’s ‘practical imperative,’ every individual should “act to treat humanity, whether in thine own person or in that of any other, in every case as an end withal, never as a means only” (Kant). A leader who mobilizes people solely as a means and with sole intention of achieving his or her own personal goals does not qualify as a True Leader. This facet of the definition resolves the apparent tension between intentions and consequences by agreeing with the Kantian notion that “what is essentially good consists in the mental disposition, let the consequence be what it may” (Kant). Even if an individual does not achieve the outcome that he or she intended, that person still qualifies as a leader in so far as the intention was to inspire people, as ends in themselves, to achieve a goal, for the benefit of the group as a whole. In short, True Leadership demands a moral purpose in service to others.
Assuming the prerequisite of having chosen a cause with a moral purpose, the first characteristic that a leader should possess is a determination that is driven by a passion for the cause. In order to successfully inspire people around a chosen goal, a leader must first dedicate him (her) self to promoting the cause and mobilizing support. As stated by Royce, a “leader must believe the enterprise worthwhile, must proclaim its importance in vigorous terms, and must patiently stand by the club through all the doubtful first period of its existence” (Royce, 126). Not only must the leader have unwavering determination to the goal, but more importantly, the leader must inspire his or her followers to fully dedicate themselves to achieving the goal. The leader must push the group through adversity and inspire them to constantly work towards their goal. In doing so, an individual becomes a leader by translating a vision into a reality for a group of people.
A true leader should be genuine. Contrary to the ideas of 18th century Italian philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli, a leader should not try to be a “great simulator and dissimulator” by deceitfully appearing to have virtuous qualities, which in reality, he or she does not possess. Thus, merely reciting the principles of leadership from books on the subject is not sufficient. Only by being genuinely devoted to helping a group achieve its goals, will followers also develop a genuine and whole-hearted commitment to the goal. Consequently, a second requirement of True Leadership, is that a leader must always lead by example. Followers emulate their leaders—if the leader is perceived to be deceitful and uncommitted, these qualities will be reflected in his or her followers. For example, former Cuban President Fidel Castro mobilized a group of supporters in an effort to overthrow dictator Fulgencio Batista. However, Castro was also motivated by an underlying desire to attain power. Thus, it comes as no surprise that once he seized power, he had to purge his group of many followers, who also sought the maximization of their own power. Seeing that Castro was not entirely devoted to the goal of social justice, his followers were not entirely devoted and developed ulterior motives throughout the course of the revolution. This is consistent with Stogdill’s finding that “subordinates expect to behave as they perceive their superiors to behave” (Stogdill, 334).
The final three qualities necessary for True Leadership are strength, ingenuity and adaptability. With regard to the first two, a leader must be like Machiavelli’s conception of the ‘fox and the lion’ by being “a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to dismay wolves” (Machiavelli, 65). Every leader will inevitably be confronted with both hardships and enemies. By having strength and ingenuity, the leader will develop ways to overcome these hardships and to outwit his or her enemies. In doing so, the leader, leading by example, will equip the group with the skills to do so as well. Furthermore, ingenuity plays a particularly important role in True Leadership because without it, a leader will not be able to “align competing interests to achieve a common goal.” A leader must be capable of applying ideas to solve problems and meet challenges. Despite the importance of the goal to the group overall, each individual follower may pursue the goal for vastly different reasons. For example, while some followed Ingrid Newkirk – leader of the PETA organization – due to a desire to eliminate animal testing, others followed her due to an opposition to the killing of animals whatsoever. The best leaders are those who are have the ingenuity to focus the different interests and energy of followers, in pursuit of the chosen goal. The inability for a leader to do so will spark fragmentation, and ultimately, will lead to failure of the group's cause.
Finally, with regard to adaptability, the leader must be able to adjust to changing circumstances. According to Ralph Stogdill’s Handbook on Leadership, “the evidence suggests that leadership is a relation that exists between persons in a social situation, and that persons who are leaders in one situation may not necessarily be leaders in other situations” (Stogdill, 64). Likewise, True Leadership often rests on a leader’s capacity to adapt. Adaptability enables a leader to drive his or her followers in constant pursuit of the goal, regardless of the circumstances. This ensures that the leader in fact can lead in all situations. Furthermore, adaptability also will protect a leader from ruin because, as stated by Machiavelli, "having always prospered by walking one path, he cannot persuade himself to depart from it,” leading to ruin (Machiavelli, 92).
Although the above qualities are critical to True Leadership, there is a long-standing debate as to whether these qualities are ‘made’ rather than ‘born.’ Contrary to Machiavellian notions of princes as being exceptional human beings, any person, irrespective of race, income, religion, or even gender, can be a leader. As stated by Stogdill, “a person does not become a leader by virtue of the possession of some combination of traits” (Stogdill, 63). Being born with these traits does not make a person a leader. Rather, a person becomes a leader by nurturing these traits and applying them to the accomplishment of a worthy cause. Indeed, it is the application of leadership traits to the extent necessary, and using them to align the interests of individuals and inspiring them towards a common goal, that defines True Leadership. While being born with these qualities may help expedite the process, they do not necessarily make a leader who was ‘born’ with leadership qualities any better than a leader who ‘developed’ them.
Despite the seeming simplicity of the definition True Leadership, a common tension still arises: is True Lleadership more based on being viewed by followers as absolutely moral or as effective? As noted above, morality certainly plays a role in the identification of the leader’s goal or vision. The leader should be ‘moral’ in selecting a worthy cause - one that is not self-serving. A leader also should avoid engaging in unethical conduct that will undermine the trust of his followers. However, with regard to the followers view of leadership conduct itself, effectiveness often prevails over morality. Although Kant’s ‘Categorical Imperative’ of acting “only in accordance with that maxim through which one can at the same time will that it become a universal law” is great in theory, it is practically impossible for any leader to be viewed by all followers as acting morally in all circumstances (Kant). Even if a leader is highly ethical and acts with the best of intentions, there is always the potential for someone to regard his or her actions in a specific situation as immoral. An attempt to conform every action to stringent prescriptive commands of morality can doom a leader to perpetual failure because ultimately, it is impossible to be viewed as entirely moral by all followers at all times. Therefore, True Leadership requires that a leader focus on being effective, while ensuring that his personal conduct is ethical and does not undermine the bond of trust with followers.
Unlike Machiavellian ideals of effectiveness emphasizing the ‘art of warfare,’ ‘fear over love,’ and the use of force, the type of effectiveness required for True Leadership centers primarily around inspiration and astuteness. So long as an individual is capable of continually inspiring the group to work towards a goal despite failure, and so long as the leader continues to unify competing interests, that person is deemed an effective leader.
Leadership thus can be defined as the ability to inspire others and to align their competing interests to achieve a common goal. Effective leaders have good intentions; lead by example; and are determined, genuine, strong, ingenious and adaptable. Any individual can be a leader, whether male or female, rich or poor, or black or white. So long as a leader translates a vision into a reality, and aligns interests in its pursuit, that person can become a True Leader."
Authored by Jacqueline G. Diaz. Reprinted with permission from www.ushaa.com.