Too late to be part two of the “IQ is dead” piece
The recent intense discussions about leadership on Thought Leader speak volumes about our diverse understandings of what leadership really is. There seems to be as many different views about what leaders are expected to be and do as there are readers out there. My take is that great leadership — and I mean good, effective leadership that delivers, not just populist sloganeering leadership — is not easy to find. But it is out there and starts with each one of us. I know, I know, it is a tough responsibility, this leadership thing. Hence many of us don’t want to hold public office, but have this begrudging itch that we scratch by constantly taking a swipe at public office bearers regardless of what they represent.
Of course we cannot all be public office bearers (note the use of office bearers as opposed to leaders here; there are huge differences between the two). Many among us would rather stand on the sidelines and point — wag — fingers at office bearers for all the huge blunders they are making daily.
Poking holes in anyone’s work is the easiest thing to do. We gorge on heavy criticism of those we don’t like, or with whom we don’t agree, and fall in love with whoever is doing it (on our behalf!). We lap it up in large dollops because it feeds a yearning deep within us to feel a sense of being right, of belonging, a kind of togetherness against the common enemy, or to feel worthy and better than the next (that we don’t agree with, or don’t look like). It is effectively a primal itch, the animal wanting to jump out and do its thing. Leadership evokes all this, especially none-serving leadership. Well, not serving the general good at least.
Pieces of writing genius such as Ivo’s, Sandile’s, Trapido’s or the rib-cracking, juicy-funny Silwane Files by Ndumiso, and many others, can be regarded as trash by some; strong reasons can be given to back that up. Easy stuff, that. Anyone can do the dismissing thing. It’s the standing up and doing your own thing that is not so easy.
Doing something about a less-than-satisfactory situation one finds oneself in calls for bigger, harder balls than finger pointing does. This is why there are fewer genuine leaders of substance and integrity out there who stand up and challenge good-for-nothing establishments head-on, risking everything, than there are rabble-rousers and hyenas who bay for blood at the slightest hint of what disagrees with them, what threatens their comforts and interests — black, brown and white alike. This is true of so-called black diamonds and white middle-class whingers whom research shows become richer every day and are the biggest beneficiaries from democracy. I would say that this is a contestable argument any day. Let me get back to resonant leadership …
There is one good reason why each one of us has a favourite leader(s) in our country and globally. It is because something in and about them resonates with us. This is something that touches that soft spot in us, something that makes us feel they represent a part of us, or that they know a part of our story. It is something beyond nationalist sentiment, beyond what we feel is good rhetoric, something more tangible than party membership, and stronger than racial background (the pettiest of categorisations!).
This is the profound influence of resonant leadership.
On the one hand, we have heartless populist and opportunistic leaders, those who watch out for assumed weaknesses in others, capitalise on cracks in social cohesion and present less-than-feasible but popular options. These options buy them space and time in the minds of supporters, and they can do serious damage within that space (in people’s confidence) and time (in office). We have enough examples around us and around the world today. Take your pick.
Great leaders, on the other hand, make an effort to be resonant leaders, to be in harmony with their followers and with anyone who can see the value their leadership style adds to the general social or national good. Such leaders do not necessarily need to hold public office. You can always tell when a populist leader is masquerading as a resonant leader, in touch with people’s interests.
How exactly can you tell? You see this when such leaders demand to be placed in public or high office, or claim this or that particular spot for themselves by hook or by crook, or by whipping up emotions or dividing followers. Hitler perfected it. He has a live fan club of currently active and aspiring leaders itching to do the same in one form or another — that is, ascend to power on the wave of general public hysteria of one kind or another.
I have resisted talking about this but no, I don’t think that there is any of that within any of our political parties just yet. The ANC Polokwane results tell a fascinating story of a budding, beautiful democracy where people have a chance to pick and choose who they want to lead them. The big, elephant-in-the-room-question is: What were the real reasons behind all those developments. I mean, besides and beyond the spokespeople’s sound bites? To this day, none of the commentators out there has convinced me of the reasons why things panned out the way they did. I think we are yet to find out that one much, much later. In the meantime, I pray it will be a group of resonant leaders — and emotionally intelligent leaders (with ubuntu intelligence in their blood) — that will lead this country from 2009 onwards. Such leaders, I hope again, are learning from the current scenarios, from developments right this moment, and ensuring a deeper connection with the people who put them in those positions.
Leaders who have resonance connect emotionally to their followers and anyone else interested in what they are working on. I will say it again: these are leaders who lead with emotional intelligence. They acknowledge that the feelings, emotions, thoughts and lives of their followers matter more than how much power they wield themselves. Resonant leaders know that leadership is really more about managing relationships than wielding power. It is these types of leaders that are often referred to as server or servant leaders. They understand that they are there to serve the general public. They are not there to be served huge salaries and perks, nor are they there to help themselves to public resources.
It is not every leader who can manage relationships very well. Managing relationships well requires specialised masterful skills and the ability to engage others, to connect with them, to communicate with them in a manner that ensures they listen and do not feel patronised or bullied. It is about the skills to generate dialogue and not merely make tired, predictable pronouncements. The challenge is for leaders at high levels to realise that the “rules of engagement” have changed.
Any future-looking organisation or business seeking to have a lasting impact and success in today’s challenges will do itself a huge favour by focusing on the whole person as a resource and an asset, and not regard its people as tools to be used and replaced by others when deemed ineffective or blunt. Leaders who connect to the whole person, especially emotionally, and not just the brains (IQ) or the technical expertise of each employee/member, stand a much better chance of success than the ones led solely by hard, logico-rational approaches.
Gone are the days of “leaving emotions at the gate or at home” when going to work. Organisational development (OD) analysts, business leaders and systems analysts the world over now recommend that within organisations, management must strive to develop a state of emotional connectedness where management and staff can easily read each other’s unspoken messages. It is the how part of this that remains a challenge to many of our business leaders and managers.
When leaders have their fingers not in every pie, but on the “emotional pulse” of their teams and of the organizations they lead, going to work and working in any system, tends to become a fulfilling pleasure, and people get along much easier with less tension, less mistrust and limited suspicions of what the next person is up to (especially the leader). There is general resonance. There is underlying harmony. Differences do not result in immediate lynching by the majority or the powerful.
The good thing is that emotional intelligence, resonant and server leadership are all skills that can be taught or learnt through practice.
There is a growing belief in business schools across the world today that effective leaders are those who are emotionally attuned to their roles, tasks and relationships. These are resonant leaders who are emotionally intelligent. Such leaders are aware that they shape the emotional tone and climate of their organisations, their countries or the planet, and this happens whether they do it intentionally and consciously or not.
Hearing this can be frightening for many so-called “old-fashioned” leaders who believe that emotions must stay outside the business premises. The old dictum says that change is the only constant; the business environment is constantly changing, and at a frenetic pace too. Today’s business and political environments demand a new calibre of leaders who relate to their followers differently, who are in touch with themselves and with their own emotions, and who are authentic about who they are. This is another tough call for many leaders today: this authenticity thing.
Granted, different businesses and their specific circumstances require different types of leadership in different contexts. There is no one prescribed leadership characteristic or trait that works equally well across the board.
The question that is generally asked is: Must all leaders be emotionally intelligent? The answer is: most definitely! Critical to being effective as a leader is the ability to communicate one’s vision and direction. In order to do this well, leaders must be good at communication. This encapsulates the ability to understand oneself, and one’s emotions or emotional state, and to be able to tune in to the emotions of others, especially those with whom one is communicating, consulting, working closely — or leading.
Researchers in EI have said many times that people are generally a bundle of emotions. We all are, really. Mastering one’s emotions is not about how well one suppresses one’s emotions. It is about accepting the emotions as raw as they are, owning them and being at peace with them. This forms parts of the essence of authenticity: being truly you; no keeping up appearances.
Powerful leadership has a powerful chemical element in it, and that has an emotional tone to it. Yes, leadership is a chemistry thing. In a twisted way, I think that some of these “great leaders” tune in to your endorphins and play havoc with your senses from there on … and the opposite is true of nasty leaders too. A leader deemed nasty to someone is a hero to another. We have all heard the story about “a terrorist here is a hero over there”. It is true, and that is the challenge. What is my truth is not necessarily your truth, no matter how strongly I/you believe it to be so.
Osama Bin Laden and George Bush have similar claims to heroism in their respective constituencies. No judgements there. Whose truth matters more? On what grounds? Ideas of a global moral cop are so yesteryear, so I would park that far away. In fact, the global-cop-type ideas are the source of the crap conditions we find in the global economy today: the idea that one can dictate to others what is right and wrong even before knowing what the other really is about.
What is the message about assumption again: that it is the mother of all f-ups, especially when I repeatedly assume that my truth is mightier than yours. There goes the neighbourhood!
Great leadership is about resonance, silly. And that does not grow on trees.
Author
A prince with dignity and determination
Prince Ngarambe’s goals are to become Rwanda’s first transgender model and to uplift the country’s youth
The EFF’s principles are unshakeable
Unlike the ANC, the core values of the freedom fighters do not change with each leader it elects
