Skip to content

All gush no guts

The subject of individual leadership overflows with putative experts from various quarters: business, the military, politics, sports - even mythology and fiction. Unfortunately, they typically have little new to add on this overworked, overwrought topic.

When this happens in a field, the dialogue generally tends to become mystically abstract. There’s an attraction to this for all concerned: the members of the target audience can read into it whatever they like, and the writers can shovel out remarkable quantities of verbiage without being pinned down about what any of it actually means.

But then when the gig is finally up on that phase, the discourse can turn to a sort of brazenly effusive nonsense. I’ve recently had the bemused misfortune to read one of these examples from a prominent leadership author. It was filled - just packed - with perhaps the most egregiously obnoxious, self-aggrandizing name-dropping in the genre.

It also recycled gag-inducing quotes from notables whose stars were made to shine even more luminously for their patronizingly “humble” protestations that their eminence as “leaders” isn’t about them, but about the “great people” they work with. But, of course, the author didn’t elaborate on the identity, nature, or influence of this nameless class of people trotted out as background contrast for the true centers of focus; he merely proffered this false humility as more evidence of the superlative individual qualities of his subjects.

And the theme of this essay, tying together all the functionless dross, purporting to give it form? It was that leaders should “love” leading. Indeed, candidates for senior leadership positions should be asked, specifically, how much they “love leading.”

This in-your-face fluff rises well-above the commonplaces that an effective manager will likely genuinely enjoy productive work and collaboration with colleagues. It is, rather, yet another category of singularity ascribed to the special class of individual leaders promoted by this modern leadership movement - but this time it is not just being special, but the capacity for loving being more special than other people for their sake. When will that class make it formally into our MBA programs?

I can only hope from such desperate attempts to breathe life into a dying subject that its end is near. Perhaps we’ll be able, then, to take a clearer look at what leadership in organizations really is, and how to manage it.

In the meanwhile, please consider visiting the following authors (and adding them to your regular reading) where you will learn real lessons, told effectively and meaningfully, about how organizations really work, and how individuals learn to work within them:

Thanks for stopping by, today. If you enjoyed your visit, please take a moment to subscribe, so you can visit again in the future from the convenience of your email client or RSS reader.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Sphere: Related Content

4 Comments

  1. Jim, that is a very kind and humbling mention. It’s my hope that (at least) most of what comes up at All Things Workplace meets your criteria.

    Kudos on choosing not to flame the perpetrator of “leadership love.”

    But if you can shoot off an email with the source, I’d sure like to have a look :-)

    All the best…

    Thursday, August 23, 2007 at 10:12 am | Permalink
  2. Jim Stroup wrote:

    Thanks Steve - it is my pleasure and obligation to include your site in such a list.

    Yes, I usually make my comments about this stuff general, and if I have to refer to a specific article, book, etc., of which I disapprove so strongly, I try not to link to it. No advantage for anyone served in doing that.

    But this particular article is on the way to you!

    r/

    Jim

    Thursday, August 23, 2007 at 1:25 pm | Permalink
  3. Robyn wrote:

    Hi Jim, I so agree that false words and false humilty run opposite to leadership. On the other hand,

    I’ve noted several styles that work well - perhaps that makes leadership seem paradoxical. For example, some might be charasmatic, while others might be more down-to-earth. What works well for one leader, might take another down.

    Thanks for your thoughtful post.

    Sunday, August 26, 2007 at 5:51 am | Permalink
  4. Jim Stroup wrote:

    Hello Robyn,

    Thanks for your kind words.

    I certainly agree that the issue of leadership in organizations - particularly if one views it as stemming primarily from individuals, as the author of the article I refer to does - is inexpressible more complex than the simple-minded theme of the referenced article suggests.

    Thanks so much for your visit and your kind observations!

    Sunday, August 26, 2007 at 10:42 am | Permalink

One Trackback/Pingback

  1. Business leaders | Managing Leadership on Thursday, July 3, 2008 at 9:38 am

    [...] writings emanating from its putatively most distinguished representatives - might finally be on its way out. Please see this review in the WSJ by Aram Bakshian Jr., which suggests the same, having run across [...]

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *
*
*