Getting to the heart of leadership through a dictionary can be a bit obtuse. So, instead of focusing on a dictionary definition, I look to the comments of two great historical leaders (bold emphasis is mine):

Dwight Eisenhower:

• Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it.
• You do not lead by hitting people over the head. That’s assault, not leadership.

Napoleon Bonaparte:

• A leader is a dealer in hope.

Eisenhower’s statements are a summary of an excerpt from General John Schofield’s 1879 West Point commencement speech that is memorized by all cadets. Eisenhower’s first statement defines what leadership is; his second defines what leadership is not. Contrary to what many of us think about military and leadership, there are some in the military who really understand how to approach leadership. Eisenhower used his understanding to rise to the top of the unified Allied Command in World War II and to become President of the United States.

Bonaparte had a very similar understanding of leadership two generations before Schofield: a dealer in hope. He used that understanding to inspire his troops to conquer most of the western world, an accomplishment that is not lessened by his ultimate defeat. If anything, his ultimate failure demonstrates that the leadership skills needed to stay on top change as time goes on and one’s operating environment changes. So leaders must continue to learn and improve their skills.

Leadership is Dependent on Relationships

Leadership is a process in which the followers gain hope and want to follow the leader. As such, it is vitally important to recognize how dependent that process is on the quality of the relationship between leader and followers. The process will be difficult if the relationship is poor or non-existent. The process will be much easier if the relationship is strong and respectful.

Dictionary definitions of leadership typically focus first on the “office” or “position” of the “leader”. If one looks no further, then one is left with the mis-impression that the most important component is the “office” or “position” and not the “leader”. To get to the heart of leadership, one has to go to the root word, lead. Yet even then, most dictionary definitions focus on “to guide on a way” and “to direct on a course”. The quotes from Eisenhower and Napoleon are much better and much more consistent with what appears in serious leadership literature.

Why so much focus on leadership being a process in which the followers willingly follow the leader? the answer is that social science studies published as long ago as 1939 showed that leadership style was very important in determining how individuals will act in a group. In the ground-breaking study, it was determined that hostile acts were 30 times more common under leaders who used an autocratic style rather than a democratic style. In fact, groups with autocratic leaders were much more likely to have one group member targeted for aggressive and hostile acts which would continue until the person quit the group, at which point the aggression and hostility would be focused on a new victim (Johnson and Johnson, pg. 190).

Is the lead dog in a sled team a “leader”? I used to say, “no”, but my opinion has changed. It’s true the human driver is directing the lead dog not only as to where to go, but also when. And the human driver is the only one to know why. The lead dog, however, has the opportunity to follow enthusiastically or with resentment or resignation. What does the lead dog do when it is enthusiastic? It wangs it tail and gives a cheerful bark. These are signs that are seen and heard by the other dogs, encouraging them to press forward as a team. In the end, the human driver’s direction combined with the lead dog’s enthusiasm and willingness to act in concert with him whether the team survives the harsh arctic conditions. Without a positive and supportive relationship between the driver and the lead dog, the team would fair poorly.

If you are a first-line employee, can you be a leader in your organization? The answer is yes, you can. We’ll get into that in a future post.

---

Excerpt from General John Scofield’s commencement address to the West Point class of 1979

The discipline which makes the soldiers of a free country reliable in battle is not to be gained by harsh or tyrannical treatment. On the contrary, such treatment is far more likely to destroy than to make an army. It is possible to impart instruction and give commands in such a manner and such a tone of voice as to inspire in the soldier no feeling, but an intense desire to obey, while the opposite manner and tone of voice cannot fail to excite strong resentment and a desire to disobey. The one mode or the other of dealing with subordinates springs from a corresponding spirit in the breast of the commander. He who feels the respect which is due to others cannot fail to inspire in them respect for himself. While he who feels, and hence manifests, disrespect towards others, especially his subordinates, cannot fail to inspire hatred against himself.

– John M. Schofield

---

References

•  
  Johnson, D. and Johnson, F. (2003) Joining Together: group theory and group skills (8th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.