1 Introduction

Leadership traits tell who a leader is as leader. Leadership styles tell what a leader does in the process of leading. In this article we are going to explore the leadership styles found in the research of three different researches:

1. Kurt Lewin
2. Renis Likert
3. Daniel Goleman

Each of these individuals discovered a different set of leadership styles. While there is a great deal of overlap, they all allow you to view leadership from a different vantage point. In addition to these three, there are many other researchers who have developed many other systems for categorizing leadership styles. Each has a slightly different emphasis and perspective on how to view the way people lead.

There is no “correct” point of view in examining leadership styles. Each view is valuable and emphasizes different aspects of leadership in different environments. As a leader, a study of different leadership styles can help give you better perspective and make you more conscious about what methods you utilize to lead others.

In matters of style, swim with the current;
In matters of principle, stand like a rock.
~T. Jefferson (leadership quotes)

A good leader is not going to be stuck using a single leadership style. Leaders will consciously or unconsciously shift between and blend leadership styles in order to best achieve their goal. The most valuable thing you can get out of this article is a better understanding of what your default style is, its weaknesses and strengths, and the ability to deliberately choose an appropriate leadership style when faced with a new situation.

2 Kurt Lewin’s Leadership Climates

In 1939 a German-American psychologist named Kurt Lewin categorized the environments in which people experience leadership into three different approaches. These approaches depend on the style of the leader and the result determines what Lewin described as the “leadership climate” of an organization.

The three different styles or climates are:

1. Authoritative / Autocratic
2. Democratic / Participative
3. Laissez-faire / Delegative

These three styles determine how a leader directs works and interacts with subordinates in giving praise and criticism Just like climates in weather, leadership styles can shift to adapt to the situation. A leader’s style is usually going to be a combination of styles with a emphasis on one in particular.

2.1 Authoritarian Leadership

An authoritarian leadership style is also referred to as an autocratic style. In this leadership style the leader makes the decisions with little or no input from the people who will be doing the actual work. In Lewin’s study he found that this leadership style led to the most discontent and produced the least creative solutions. He also found that it was difficult to make the switch from an authoritarian leadership style to a participative leadership style while the reverse was not so difficult.

Often an authoritarian style is associated with a abusive leadership. While the autocratic style can be done in an abusive manner, it is important to realize that a leader can use the autocratic leadership style without being abusive. In fact, there are some situations that call for an authoritarian style as the most effective.

For example, when the leader is the only one with the technical skills and knowledge to make a particular decision, the autocratic style may be in the best interest of the organization. In such a case, additional discussion and input from the subordinates would be unlikely to alter the decision made. Other situations that require an authoritarian approach would be time sensitive decisions where group input would be detrimental.

Typically symphony orchestras follow this style of leadership. The conductor makes the decisions and tells everyone what to do. The conductor picks the music and decides how each musician is to play it. The second violinist isn’t asked her opinion on how loud a particular passage should be and the percussionists don’t take a vote on the tempo.

Obviously this has certain advantages. The conductor is in the best place to hear the sound as a whole while the individual musicians are not. The conductor is also likely to be the most skilled in dealing with the piece of music as a whole while the individual musicians are most skilled at their particular instrument. There are some orchestras that take a different approach. Most notable is probably the Orpheus Chamber Orchestra which we will discuss in more detail under the other leadership styles.

The important thing to remember about an autocratic, authoritarian style of leadership is that it is not innately bad. It can be very effective and a very important style to use—even if it is not your primary way of leading. The ability to switch styles as necessary to get the best results is a sign of a well rounded leader.

2.2 Participative Leadership

Participative leadership is also known as democratic leadership. In this leadership style, the leader consults with the group in order to make decisions. Subordinates have input and are given choices. The leader is still heavily involved in guiding the decision and usually retains the right to override team made choices as necessary.

Most leaders who make use of a democratic leadership style will still switch to the autocratic style occasionally when it is necessary or when a certain circumstances requires an autocratic decision to be made.

Most people are happiest with a participative leadership style and it usually produces the greatest motivation and creativity. In some studies with children, the democratic style was less productive, but the quality of contributions was much higher than when under an autocratic style of leadership. This is an important point to note. Different changes in leadership style can produce different results. By tailoring your leadership style toward the desired end result you can better achieve organizational goals.

For example, the study involving children suggests that when the volume of work is most important and autocratic leadership style may be appropriate, but if the quality of each person’s contribution is desired, participative / democratic leadership may produce better results.

I previously mentioned the Orpheus Chamber Orchestra. They are typically known as a leadershipless or conductorless orchestra. They make their decisions as a group and there is no conductor in charge. Of course this is very different from the way most orchestras are run and their style of leadership falls somewhere between participative and delegative. While they don’t have a conductor, the group self-organizes to give a particular person a leadership role for a particular piece of music. In this way there is a leader responsible for each piece, but each piece gets a different leader. The musician given responsibility for a piece of music acts in a much more participative style rather than the autocratic style typically used by conductors.

2.3 Delegative Leadership

Deligative leadership is also referred to as the laissez-faire leadership style. This style is characterized by leaders who leave most of the decision making process up to their teams with very little input. Leaders who use this style of leadership typically take a hands-off approach.

This style is generally less effective than the autocratic or democratic styles. In situations where the team is highly skilled, delegative leadership can work, but if too much of the decision making is handled in a laissez-faire way, it can be detrimental to motivation. Since the leader is not closely involved, positive feedback for a well done job is often lacking. Motivation can suffer when positive actions don’t result in some type of positive feedback. On the flip side, a lack of criticism, suggestions and directions can damage motivation as well.

If you ever hear someone complain that it doesn’t matter whether they work hard or not, they are probably working under a deligative leadership style with little feedback in an environment that lacks good motivational input.

As mentioned above a delegative style can create an environment like Orpheus Chamber Orchestra enjoys. However, for this to be effective, the team must self-organize which basically means they take the freedom of the delegative approach and use it to create a participative environment. The take away from this is that people need leadership, but it doesn’t have to be forced on them. When you leave a team without leadership or with the freedom to do whatever they way, the most effective way for them to function is to create some type of leadership structure and at a minimum put different people in charge of different areas.

3 Renis Likert’s Management Systems

In the 1960s Renis Likert outlined four systems of management to show how managers and subordinates interact. The four systems are:

1. Exploitive Authoritative
2. Benevolent Authoritative
3. Consultative
4. Participative

Likert used his studies to create a model that successfully predicted the performance of organizations in the future based on the current management systems that were in place.

3.1 Exploitative

In an exploitative system, subordinates follow the decisions of their leaders with little or no input. Aversion to negative consequences and punitive measures are the main motivating factor. An exploitative system falls under the authoritarian leadership style by Lewin, but it typically a negative working environment.

Exploitative systems typically have very poor communication and very little teamwork. Instructions come down from the person in charge and are given to the people doing the work, but there is very little feedback going up the chain of command. This means that leadership is operating without the benefit of knowing what is really happening in the work process.

It is interesting to note that there is also very little horizontal communication in this system. The environment created doesn’t lend itself well to communication among peers which leads to very little teamwork even within groups that work together. The environment created by top leadership creates a teamwork disfunction even at levels where workers could do otherwise.

3.2 Benevolent

The benevolent system also falls under the authoritarian style, but the negative factors are replaced with positive rewards as the primary motivating factor. This system will typically have more communication and more teamwork than the exploitative system, but still ranks relatively low on both factors.

The differences in motivation leads to a better more positive view among the workers. In some cases it may result in a higher degree of loyalty to the organization. However, the problem with information not traveling back up the chain still exists and leadership still lacks the data necessary to make the best decisions.

3.3 Consultative

This system involves a blend of Lewin’s authoritarian and participative style of leadership. There is more collaboration between leaders and their subordinates than either of the purely autocratic systems, but collaboration is usually limited to only certain areas. In many cases, communication appears to be flowing back up the chain of command, but subordinates are very careful what information they divulge. The culture of this system rarely makes workers feel free to express the truth when there are problems because there is not a strong sense of teamwork between different levels of the chain of command.

However, compared to the two authoritarian styles, this stye enjoys significantly more trust with subordinates and creates a great deal more communication—even if some of it is filtered. This facilitates a much higher degree of teamwork than the other styles in Likert’s model. This team work occurs both up and down the hierarchy and laterally among peers.

3.4 Participative

The participative system matches nicely with the participative climate from Lewin’s research. In this system there is much more interaction between leaders and subordinates and communication flows freely. Motivation is based on rewards as well as the desire to perform well at mutually agreed upon tasks toward mutually agreed upon goals.

One of the biggest differences between this system and the consultative system is the degree of trust subordinates have for upper leadership. In the consultative system, workers are much more comfortable sharing bad news because there is less fear of reprisal on the bearer of the message. Problems are viewed as things that need to be fixed by the entire chain of command instead of something that needs to be blamed on someone.

In Likert’s model, this is the optimal system when trying to maximize production. It is characterized by a shared sense of responsibility at all levels of the organization, free flowing communication and significant teamwork both up and down the chain of command and across—between peers and separate teams.

4 Daniel Goleman Leadership Styles

Daniel Goleman is the author of Primal Leadership which categorizes leadership into six styles. These styles are:

1. Visionary / Authoritative
2. Coaching
3. Affiliative
4. Democratic
5. Pacesetting
6. Commanding / Coercive

4.1 Visionary/Authoritative Leadership Style

A visionary leadership style focuses on the vision or where the organization needs to go while leaving the actual details up to the team. If an organization needs to go from point A to point B a visionary leader will be best at defining what point B actually is. However, they may be less adept at creating a good map showing how to navigate from A to B or in defining the necessary processes to support such a transition. (It is worth noting that until recent times, the term visionary had negative connotations of an impractical dreamer.)

Still with many organizations this type of leadership is very effective because it holds people accountable for their results toward a goal without getting in the way of how they want to work. It is particularly effective when an organization lacks a clear vision or when a change of direction is necessary. It can be less effective when working with a group of experts with a great deal of experience and in situations where the goal is easily defined. In those cases the team may question the value provided by the leader if there is no contribution to the actual process of achieving the goal.

4.2 Coaching Leadership Style

A leader who adopts a coaching style of leadership will do best working one-on-one with employees, helping them improve their skills, mentoring them and helping them better understand the goals of the organization and how those goals relate to their own personal development desires. The leader is focused on encouraging subordinates to try different suggestions while providing feedback and helping interpret the results and consequences of their decisions and actions.

This type of leadership can be very effective with employees who are looking to improve their skills and develop their careers. However, leaders need to be very careful not to slip into becoming too “hands-on” and micromanaging. Coaching leadership needs to steer subordinates but still give them the ability to make their own decisions and learn from small failures. The leader needs to be good at giving feedback and evaluating performance in a positive way.

4.3 Affiliative Leadership Style

Leaders who practice this style of leadership focus on group dynamics. Their goal is to create strong teams that work well together. This style focuses on lowering stress levels and creating good relationships between members of the team. This type of leadership is especially effective when there have been problems within the organization and morale and trust is low.

New leaders coming in to an organization after a catastrophe will find this style of leadership especially effective. It provides a strong foundation of trust and helps meet people’s need to be understood and valued. In most situations leaders will benefit from making use of the affiliate leadership style in addition to other styles.

4.4 Democratic Leadership Style

Democratic leadership involves allowing the group to collaboratively decide on the direction and goal. This style focuses on getting input from everyone and a high degree of involvement. Leaders skilled in this area are adept at pulling out contributions from quiet members of the team and making sure that everyone contributes their opinion to the decision making process.

In situations where a leadership role doesn’t come with any formal authority, democratic leadership can be the only viable approach. Since the focus is on getting consensus, it works well when the leader can’t unilaterally make a decision on their own. Regardless of whether the leader has authority or not, the democratic style of leadership can help establish a deep commitment to the plan, goal and vision by team members that is difficult to replicate using more authoritative styles.

4.5 Pacesetting Leadership Style

Pacesetting leaders focus on performance and typically set extremely high goals. This leads to an environment that is intensely focused on improvements or at least improvements as defined by the leader. This type of approach can get fast results from a competent skilled team, but over time the results of exclusively using this form of leadership is negative.

Pacesetting leaders leave very little room for input from the rest of the team. This style can be a good way to quickly win a war or get things done quickly, but it overlooks the value of other members. Ignoring other’s input will make it particularly difficult for the leader to recover from any mistakes.

The redeeming quality of pacesetting style leadership is that the leader is usually setting high standards that are in keeping with their personal standards. In other words, they achieve very high performance for themselves and want others to do the same. If coaching sits beside subordinates and helps guide them forward, pacesetting charges forward while telling everyone else to keep up.

In some ways pacesetting style leadership has some of the attributes of commanding/coercive leadership, but with the positive aspect of leading the way. Still the long term results of pace setting is negative.

4.6 Commanding/Coercive Leadership Style

As the name implies this is the leadership style typically associated with the military. It differs from the Visionary/Authoritative style in that instructions tend to be much more detailed instead of just focused on the end result. It differs from the Pacesetting style in that in that pacesetters are generally asking others to follow their lead and keep up, while command/coercive leaders are usually sending people out.

Generally this is a negative style of leadership, but there are some situations where it can be effective. The military is one good example. Situations that require quick decisions to deal with a crisis are places where this style might be an effective choice.

For this post, I asked a number or prominent leadership experts the following question:

If you were hiring someone you hoped to groom for a leadership position, what key things would you look for?

Below you will find their insightful answers along with some comments of my own.

I would look for someone willing to take risks. Fail often, fail fast, fail cheap. I would look for someone who wants to learn and who is coachable. I would look for someone who is willing to serve those they lead. I would look for someone who is willing to take a stand. Someone with vision. Someone who can simplify and clarify thoughts.

Jim Estill from Time Leadership – CEO Blog

Risk taking isn’t always the first thing people think of looking for in a new leader, but Jim makes a good point that you want someone who knows how to take and learn from small risks so they can grow quickly with minimal negative consequences from mistakes.

Willingness to connect with others based on strengths and a commitment to both results and relationships in all situations at all times.

David Zinger from Employee Engagement

A leader who is unable to deeply connect with others is unlikely to get any real followers other than people who are just coming along for the pay check.

Intellectual horsepower, creativity, strategic agility, results orientation and the ability to stay calm and composed under pressure. I would ask questions which invite the potential leader to tell me stories about a time of inspiration, a time of crisis and a time when results were improved.

Bea Fields from Five Star Leader.com

Asking people to tell you about times of crisis and when things have gone wrong is an excellent idea.  You want a leader who learns from mistakes. If they haven’t made any mistakes, they probably aren’t really leadership material–at least not yet.

Initiative, self respect, respect for others, optimism and character.

Jim Cathcart from Cathcart Institute, Inc

Character is often something people overlook in cultures that are very results oriented, but a lack of character usually comes back to bite you at the worst possible moment.

Desire to learn. Work ethic. Honesty. Communication skills. Ability to encourage and unite others. Positive Energy.

Jon Gordon from www.JonGordon.com

Honesty is very important, not only from the “people don’t like to be lied to” standpoint, but also because a dishonest person is likely to lie to themselves.  You don’t want a leader who is going to take everyone down with the ship just because he/she is unwilling to admit a mistake.

Good people skills, technical competence, a positive attitude

Bussta Brown from Leadership Cultivation

There are lots of people with technical competence, but whose negative attitude prevents them from being successful in any type of leadership position.

• A keen interest in the success of others.
• A desire to learn new things – new points of view and to be able to incorporate those points of view into their own thinking.
• The ability to communicate complex ideas simply.
• A natural tendency for excellence in all things.
• Adaptability – the knowledge that nothing stays the same. For anything to grow it must change. What was done yesterday may not need to be done (or should be done) tomorrow.

Paul Hebert from Incentive Intelligence

The “natural tendency for excellence” is an interesting thought. Some people simply have higher standards for themselves and their work than others. While you want someone with excellence, you need someone who understands the balance between excellence and efficiency as it relates to your organization.

Attitude and Ambition of the person would be the key attributes that I would look out for, far beyond all other credentials like education and IQ. I have seen it repeatedly that good leaders are the ones, who possess a good attitude towards learning and correction at the same time remaining ambitious about their goals.

Sangeeth Varghese from LeadCap: Building a nation of leaders

It is interesting how many very high IQ people are complete failures. I think people who have found everything in life easy are ill prepared for succeeding when something is hard. A less intelligent, but more motivated person can easily succeed just because they have built up the stamina over the years necessary to press through.

A love of leading people. Most great leaders that I have met love leading people. They have a desire to inspire others – and a willingness to make others ‘winners’. Achievement is all about ‘me’ – leadership is all about ‘them’.

Marshall Goldsmith from Marshall Goldsmith Library

I think part of this comes down to wanting to see others around you succeed.

1. Passion- Good leaders are in it for more than a paycheck.
2. Humility- Good leaders treat the janitor the same as the CEO
3. Emotional Intelligence – This relatively new field of study provides a wealth of insight into how leadership works. A great starting point is the book Primal Leadership by Goleman and Boyatzis.

Tad Thompson from Total Leadership

The point about humility really stands out to me–primarily because it is a trait many leaders lack and it often becomes the root of embarrassing failures of integrity.

I would look for intelligence. There is no substitute for broad intelligence that includes a balance of intuition, common sense, and logical thinking. This combination is quite rare but is absolutely essential, especially for senior leaders.

Will Marre from Will Marre’s Blog Site

This is somewhat in contrast to Sangeeth Varghese’s suggestion, but there is definitely room for a focus on both.

Intelligence, thoughtfulness, and a willingness to act independently. Little else matters.

Carmine Coyote from Slow Leadership

Interesting perspective on the most important aspects of leadership.

Insight, Influence, Integrity, Wanting to make a difference through the growth and development of others.

Shelley Holmes from Leadership and Motivation Training

The ability to see others as people to be developed rather than used is an important part of being a leader rather than just a manager.

A leader needs two basic skills: to see the future and to persuade others to follow her/him. I’d look for the basics ingredients for these, such as curiosity, a passion for learning, care and concern for others, reliability, honesty, organisation. Seeing the future also needs some indefinables like ‘business nous’ and a deep understanding of the market and its dynamics.

David Straker from Changing Minds

David’s suggestions come down to having a vision and being able to sell others on that vision. Without these two skills, a leader will not be able to attract followers, which of course is the very definition of being a leader.

Vision, balance, and honesty.

• Vision to look ahead, to see solutions, anticipate concerns, and view issues from the perspective of others.
• Balance in life and work, recognizing the importance of diversity and understanding that the opinion of other is important.
• Honesty about weaknesses and strengths. Willing to be accountable and to take ownership.

Don Frederiksen from Lead Quietly

The skill of balance is an interesting thought–something I don’t think anyone else mentioned.

I look for things that we can’t train people in. You either show up with them or not. Here are the big four things that you should bring to a leadership job.

• Willingness to pitch in. Leadership is hard work and a person won’t suddenly develop a taste for hard work. A lazy boss kills morale and productivity.
• Willingness to talk to others about performance and behavior. If you can’t do this, you can’t correct performance or help people grow and you can’t get rid of people who are poisoning your team and wrecking performance.
• Willingness to decide. This is another key part of a leader’s job. You won’t succeed if you waffle back and forth or pass every decision up to your boss.
• Joy in helping others succeed. When you become a leader your jobs are to accomplish the mission and care for the people. Leaders who love helping others succeed find that they succeed along with their team.

Wally Bock from Three Star Leadership

Looking for the attributes that you can’t teach to an up and coming leader is a very wise approach.

1. The genuine desire to communicate and connect with others (you can’t fake it) and the capacity to develop that skill,
2.  The ability to see the unique distinctions in seemingly small ideas, ideas the rest of us tend to ignore, skip, or gloss over as we are looking for the next big thing, often not seeing what is right in front of us. Leaders are intensely curious.
3. Bravery without impulsiveness or hurtful carelessness
4. Impatience without tunnel vision or arrogance
5. An absolute refusal to accept “yeah, but” “can’t” or “won’t” Leaders are constantly asking “Why not?” (Their impatience in #4 is with those who love the status quo and prefer to stay beneath the radar)

Rosa Say from Talking Story

I like Rosa’s point about bravery and it is similar to Jim Estill’s point about taking risks. You won’t often see “bravery” listed on a job description, but it is very important for leadership roles.

Someone who does what they say they’re going to do. Someone who tackles bad news or difficult problems head-on rather than avoiding them. Someone who knows how to make other people want to work on their team.

Alison Green from Ask a Manager

A lack of follow through is the downfall of many people and it generally is something that is hard to teach. If someone doesn’t innately have follow through as part of their character, it is difficult to get them to just “switch it on.”

Self-belief that is based on reality rather than delusion, combined with a track record of delivery. In your early years, that is going to be all about having responsibility but no authority. Anyone who can consistently deliver under those circumstances is usually worth having a conversation with.

Rowan Manahan from Fortify Your Oasis

I think a lot of this comes down to being honest as a leader–both with others and with yourself.

Passion for learning. Fearlessness. The unrelenting belief that change is constant and that I will embrace change and thrive amongst the opportunities that it provides.

Dan Naden from Naden’s Corner

Without learning the person who is successful today will be a failure tomorrow.

A personal and well-integrated view of what Leadership is; proof of helping to make changes (big or small) and whatever the opposition; and proof of being able to successfully develop others.

Mick Yates from LeaderValues

This comes down to having real life experience doing the things that makes people leaders–regardless of  one’s position on the organizational chart.

I would want someone that had the ability to hear others and could collaborate with others effectively. This would also need to be coupled with the ability to get things done. A great leader can’t just listen, but needs to be able to corral these ideas and thoughts into action. We need to be wary of others that have all of the answers, because someone who has all the answers doesn’t need anybody else and will never be effective in leading others.

Laura Lopez from Laura Lopez and Company

This means finding someone who has enough intelligence to understand what they do not know and enough self confidence to admit it.

• Their core values-honesty and integrity-will they do the right thing even when it’s difficult?
• an ability to influence people effectively on a team or other non-hierarchical environment
• a personal drive for excellence coupled with intellectual curiosity and on-going learning; a willingness to make mistakes and learn from them
• energy and enthusiasm
• a willingness to take responsibility
• the ability to hold themselves accountable for results
• a sense of humor

Sean Ryan from WhiteWater Consulting Group

I like point number two because it recognizes that someone with true leadership skills is going to lead regardless of their title and position.

What projects they have led and the learning from those projects. Whether they are currently meeting their goals in the current position. How they treat conflicting objectives from different departments. How they would approach rating people upon meeting or not meeting goals.

Scot Herrick from Career Management for Cubicle Warriors

Evaluating what someone has learned from their past experience is a very good way to determine how they are likely to grow in the future.

First I look for energy. I ask, does this person have the energy to take on the responsibilities of their job, plus a little bit more? Do they have enough to be able to inspire those around them? Can they manage the burden of leadership with a smile-helping people up instead of bringing them down? Will they be the sort of person that others will want to be around? Leadership is difficult. Does the candidate have the spark that suggests they are ready?

Next, I look to see if the person has the skills for the job. Do they have the technical background for the position and are they good at it? The bottom line is if we can find people whose skills (what they are good at) intersect with their passions (what they are fired up about), then we can work with them! They’ll be fine.

Lastly, I look for someone who is committed to learning. I always ask this question at interviews: What is your greatest failure, and what did you learn from it? It is amazing how many people cannot think of any failure. I always infer that the candidate is unwilling to take chances, afraid to go after the fruit on the higher branches. To me, that is where learning takes place. After training military units and their leaders at the Army’s National Training Center, I am convinced that people learn infinitely more from failure and setbacks than they do from success. Those that fail and learn are welcome on my team. Those who fail to learn are not!

Thomas Magness from Leader Business

This is an excellent point about looking for an intersection between their skills, their passions and the needs of the job. There are a lot of people whose technical skills no longer intersect with what they are really passionate about doing.

Some sit and pontificate about whether leaders are made or born. The true leader ignores such arguments and instead concentrates on developing the leadership qualities necessary for success. In this article, we are going to discuss five leadership traits or leadership qualities that people look for in a leader. If you are able to increase your skill in displaying these five quality characteristics, you will make it easier for people to want to follow you. The less time you have to spend on getting others to follow you, the more time you have to spend refining exactly where you want to go and how to get there.

The five leadership traits/leadership qualities are:

1. Honest
2. Forward-Looking
3. Competent
4. Inspiring
5. Intelligent

These five qualities come from Kouzes and Posner’s research into leadership that was done for the book The Leadership Challenge.

Your skill at exhibiting these five leadership qualities is strongly correlated with people’s desire to follow your lead. Exhibiting these traits will inspire confidence in your leadership. Not exhibiting these traits or exhibiting the opposite of these traits will decrease your leadership influence with those around you.

It is important to exhibit, model and display these traits. Simply possessing each trait is not enough; you have to display it in a way that people notice. People want to see that you actively demonstrate these leadership qualities and will not just assume that you have them. It isn’t enough to just be neutral. For example, just because you are not dishonest will not cause people to recognize that you are honest. Just avoiding displays of incompetence won’t inspire the same confidence as truly displaying competence.

The focus of each of these five traits needs to be on what people see you do–not just the things they don’t see you do. Being honest isn’t a matter of not lying–it is taking the extra effort to display honesty.

Honesty as a Leadership Quality

People want to follow an honest leader. Years ago, many employees started out by assuming that their leadership was honest simply because the authority of their position. With modern scandals, this is no longer true.

When you start a leadership position, you need to assume that people will think you are a little dishonest. In order to be seen as an honest individual, you will have to go out of your way to display honesty. People will not assume you are honest simply because you have never been caught lying.

One of the most frequent places where leaders miss an opportunity to display honesty is in handling mistakes. Much of a leader’s job is to try new things and refine the ideas that don’t work. However, many leaders want to avoid failure to the extent that they don’t admit when something did not work.

There was a medium size organization that was attempting to move to a less centralized structure. Instead of one location serving an entire city, they wanted to put smaller offices throughout the entire metro area. At the same time, they were planning an expansion for headquarters to accommodate more customers at the main site. The smaller remote offices was heralded as a way to reach more customers at a lower cost and cover more demographic areas.

After spending a considerable amount of money on a satellite location, it became clear that the cost structure would not support a separate smaller office. As the construction completed on the expanded headquarters building, the smaller office was closed. This was good decision making. The smaller offices seemed like a good idea, but when the advantages didn’t materialize (due to poor management or incorrect assumptions) it made sense to abandon the model. This was a chance for the leadership to display honesty with the employees, be candid about why things didn’t work out as expected, learn from the mistakes an move on.

Unfortunately in this situation the leadership told employees that they had planned on closing the satellite location all along and it was just a temporary measure until construction was completed on the larger headquarters building. While this wasn’t necessarily true, it didn’t quite cross over into the area of lying. Within a few months the situation was mostly forgotten and everyone moved on. Few of the employees felt that leadership was being dishonest. However, they had passed up a marvelous opportunity to display the trait of honesty in admitting a mistake.

Opportunities to display honesty on a large scale may not happen every day. As a leader, showing people that you are honest even when it means admitting to a mistake, displays a key trait that people are looking for in their leaders. By demonstrating honesty with yourself, with your organization and with outside organizations, you will increase your leadership influence. People will trust someone who actively displays honesty–not just as an honest individual, but as someone who is worth following.

Forward-Looking as a Leadership Trait

The whole point of leadership is figuring out where to go from where you are now. While you may know where you want to go, people won’t see that unless you actively communicate it with them. Remember, these traits aren’t just things you need to have, they are things you need to actively display to those around you.

When people do not consider their leader forward-looking, that leader is usually suffering from one of two possible problems:

1. The leader doesn’t have a forward-looking vision.
2. The leader is unwilling or scared to share the vision with others.

When a leader doesn’t have a vision for the future, it usually because they are spending so much time on today, that they haven’t really thought about tomorrow. On a very simplistic level this can be solved simply by setting aside some time for planning, strategizing and thinking about the future.

Many times when a leader has no time to think and plan for the future, it is because they are doing a poor job of leading in the present. They have created an organization and systems that rely too much on the leader for input at every stage.

Some leaders have a clear vision, but don’t wish to share it with others. Most of the time they are concerned that they will lose credibility if they share a vision of the future that doesn’t come about. This is a legitimate concern. However, people need to know that a leader has a strong vision for the future and a strong plan for going forward. Leaders run into trouble sharing their vision of the future when they start making promises to individuals. This goes back to the trait of honesty. If a leader tells someone that “next year I’m going to make you manager of your own division”, that may be a promise they can’t keep. The leader is probably basing this promotion on the organization meeting financial goals, but the individual will only hear the personal promise.

An organization I was working with was floundering. It seemed like everyone had a different idea about what they were trying to achieve. Each department head was headed in a different direction and there was very little synergy as small fiefdoms and internal politics took their toll.

Eventually a consulting firm was called in to help fix the problem. They analyzed the situation, talked to customers, talked to employees and set up a meeting with the CEO. They were going to ask him about his vision for the future. The employees were excited that finally there would be a report stating the direction for the organization.

After the meeting, the consultants came out shaking their heads. The employees asked how the important question had gone to which the consultants replied, “we asked him, but you aren’t going to like the answer”. The CEO had told the consultant that, while he had a vision and plan for the future, he wasn’t going to share it with anyone because he didn’t want there to be any disappointment if the goals were not reached.

Leaders can communicate their goals and vision for the future without making promises that they may not be able to keep. If a leader needs to make a promise to an individual, it should be tied to certain measurable objectives being met. The CEO in the example didn’t realize how much damage he was doing by not demonstrating the trait of being forward-looking by communicating his vision with the organization.

The CEO was forward-looking. He had a plan and a vision and he spent a lot of time thinking about where the organization was headed. However, his fear of communicating these things to the rest of the organization hampered his leadership potential.

Competency as a Leadership Quality

People want to follow someone who is competent. This doesn’t mean a leader needs to be the foremost expert on every area of the entire organization, but they need to be able to demonstrate competency.

For a leader to demonstrate that they are competent, it isn’t enough to just avoid displaying incompetency. Some people will assume you are competent because of your leadership position, but most will have to see demonstrations before deciding that you are competent.

When people under your leadership look at some action you have taken and think, “that just goes to show why he is the one in charge”, you are demonstrating competency. If these moments are infrequent, it is likely that some demonstrations of competency will help boost your leadership influence.

Like the other traits, it isn’t enough for a leader to be competent. They must demonstrate competency in a way that people notice. This can be a delicate balance. There is a danger of drawing too much attention to yourself in a way that makes the leader seem arrogant. Another potential danger is that of minimizing others contributions and appearing to take credit for the work of others.

As a leader, one of the safest ways to “toot you own horn without blowing it”, is to celebrate and bring attention to team achievements. In this way you indirectly point out your competency as a leader. For example: “Last year I set a goal of reaching $12 million in sales and, thanks to everyone’s hard word, as of today, we have reached $13.5 million.”

Inspiration as a Leadership Trait

People want to be inspired. In fact, there is a whole class of people who will follow an inspiring leader–even when the leader has no other qualities. If you have developed the other traits in this article, being inspiring is usually just a matter of communicating clearly and with passion. Being inspiring means telling people how your organization is going to change the world.

A great example of inspiration is when Steve Jobs stole the CEO from Pepsi by asking him, “Do you want to sell sugar water for the rest of your life, or do you want to change the world?” Being inspiring means showing people the big picture and helping them see beyond a narrow focus and understand how their part fits into the big picture.

One technique to develop your ability to inspire is telling stories. Stories can be examples from your customers, fictitious examples from your customers, or even historical fables and myths. Stories can help you vividly illustrate what you are trying to communicate. Stories that communicate on an emotional level help communicate deeper than words and leave an imprint much stronger than anything you can achieve through a simple stating of the facts.

Learning to be inspiring is not easy–particularly for individuals lacking in charisma. It can be learned. Take note of people who inspire you and analyze the way they communicate. Look for ways to passionately express your vision. While there will always be room for improvement, a small investment in effort and awareness will give you a significant improvement in this leadership trait.

Intelligence as a Leadership Trait

Intelligence is something that can be difficult to develop. The road toward becoming more intelligent is difficult, long and can’t be completed without investing considerable time. Developing intelligence is a lifestyle choice. Your college graduation was the beginning of your education, not the end. In fact, much of what is taught in college functions merely as a foundational language for lifelong educational experiences.

To develop intelligence you need to commit to continual learning–both formally and informally. With modern advances in distance, education it is easy to take a class or two each year from well respected professors in the evening at your computer.

Informally, you can develop a great deal of intelligence in any field simply by investing a reasonable amount of time to reading on a daily basis. The fact is that most people won’t make a regular investment in their education. Spending 30 minutes of focused reading every day will give you 182 hours of study time each year.

For the most part, people will notice if you are intelligent by observing your behavior and attitude. Trying to display your intelligence is likely to be counterproductive. One of the greatest signs of someone who is truly intelligent is humility. The greater your education, the greater your understanding of how little we really understand.

You can demonstrate your intelligence by gently leading people toward understanding–even when you know the answer. Your focus needs to be on helping others learn–not demonstrating how smart you are. Arrogance will put you in a position where people are secretly hopeful that you’ll make a mistake and appear foolish.

As unintuitive as it may seem, one of the best ways to exhibit intelligence is by asking questions. Learning from the people you lead by asking intelligent thoughtful questions will do more to enhance your intelligence credibility than just about anything. Of course this means you need to be capable of asking intelligent questions.

Everyone considers themselves intelligent. If you ask them to explain parts of their area of expertise and spend the time to really understand (as demonstrated by asking questions), their opinion of your intelligence will go up. After all, you now know more about what makes them so intelligent, so you must be smart as well. Your ability to demonstrate respect for the intellect of others will probably do more to influence the perception of your intellect than your actual intelligence.

Summary of the Five Leadership Qualities

By consciously making an effort to exhibit these traits, people will be more likely to follow you. These are the most important traits that people look for in their leaders. By exhibiting them on a regular basis, you will be able to grow your influence to its potential as a leader.

So what is the definition of leadership? Our personal leadership definition can be very different from other’s leadership definition. The goal in this post is to examine some of the different definitions of leadership. No one leadership definition is correct, but the careful analysis of multiple leadership definitions can help us better understand what it means to be a leader.

• the activity of leading; “his leadership inspired the team”
• the ability to lead; “he believed that leadership can be taught”

wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

The first definition of leadership references the activity of leading. It is important to remember that leading is something you do. It isn’t a position you hold, it is an activity. Your position may require you to lead, but it is possible to hol a leadership position without doing any actual leading.

The second definition of leadership above, talks about ability. This helps remind us that leadership is something that requires a skill. Don’t ever assume that you can lead merely because of your position. Leadership requires you to do something and it requires you to have the skills to actually lead.

• Leadership has been written as the “process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task.” Definitions more inclusive of followers have also emerged. …

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership

Wikipedia’s definition examines that the social influence perspective. This definition of leadership helps point out the importance of influencing others. It isn’t enough to tell people what to do. Your social influence is what determines your ability to actually lead. Having a plan is good, but isn’t very useful unless you have people willing to help you execute your plan.

• leader – a person who rules or guides or inspires others
• leader – drawing card: a featured article of merchandise sold at a loss in order to draw customers

wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Princeton’s definition of a leader talkes about a person who directs or inspires others. You can lead from a place of power (for example when you can fire an employee) or you can lead from a place of inspiration (where people do what you ask because they believe in you and your mission).

The final definition of a leader from Princeton is the idea of a product that draws people into your store. For example, a loss leader is an item that is priced intentionally below cost inorder to get people to the store so they wil spend money on other things. This idea of a leader is something that attracts people–it draws them in of their own free will because it is attractive and valuable. While this type of leader isn’t a person, it is helpful to think about when examining leadership definitions. being a leader requires that you attract followers in much the same way that a store product leader needs to bring in customers.

Many people get put in a leadership position and just lead by accident. They do whatever seems good at the time without viewing each action as part of an overall plan. Sometimes they do great things and sometimes they do things that really hurt them from a leadership standpoint. Leading on purpose means making decisions as part of an overall strategy to make it easier for people to follow you.

Examine Each Action From a Leadership Perspective

Whenever you get ready to do something, ask yourself if it will help or hurt your leadership influence. For example, the evening you are asking everyone else to stay and work late, probably isn’t a good time to announce that you are head off to see a movie.

As a leader people are going to watch you very closely. If you have a good relationship with the people you lead, they will bend over backwards to come through for you, but only if they don’t think you are being hypocritical.

I have seen leaders announce they were laying off workers for budgetary reasons and then spend $50,000 on remodeling their corporate apartment. Other leaders asked people to try to conserve and save money and then spent $15,000 on a custom book shelf for their office.

Both of these expenses weren’t necessarily unreasonable, but it was clear that they hadn’t thought through the consequences of their actions from a leadership perspective. It didn’t ruin their ability to lead, but it set them back. Too many mistakes like this can erode your leadership capability and move you to a place where you are leading only by authority not by earned respect.

Leaders Shouldn’t Make Promises they Can’t Keep

This is a frequent problem for leaders. They are optimistic about the future and start making promises to people based on what they want to see happen. People will understand that plans change, but if you promise you are going to do something for someone, they will expect you to follow through. When you promise something to someone, they may make very important decisions based on your promise. If you don’t come through, it can have a much bigger impact than what you see.

Here is an example that I’ve seen happen in various shapes and forms. Your organization is going through a tough year, so you can’t give out raises as promised. You talk to a few of your direct reports and apologize and promise that next year you plan to give out bigger raises than normal to make up for this year. Some people will take you at your word and buy a new house, car, or boat based on your promise of a bigger raise. This is not prudent financial management on their part, but if you are unable to keep your word you will lose some of your ability to be an effective leader with that person.

Even when they don’t go out and make financial decisions based on your promise, they will tend to mistrust you in the future. For example, I was at one organization that promised to tie year end raises to each manager’s continued education. When the new year came around, everyone was given a standard raise and the educational goals were never mentioned. The people who had been at the organization for a long period of time had just ignored the continuing education goal because they new nothing would come of it. The individuals who were new and worked to achieve the goal lost some faith in the leadership. By itself it wasn’t a that big of deal, but the leadership consistently made similar mistakes and over time, people trusted the leadership less and less.

Long Term Leadership

Leading on purpose means taking the long term approach to leadership. It means thinking about how current actions will impact your leadership ability 4 or 5 years down the road. In many situations leaders don’t think like this. They expect to move on in 2 or 3 years, so they only think about short term impact.

The problem with this approach is that the leadership legacy that you have built will follow you beyond your current job. The world is getting smaller and it is very likely that you will be working with someone in the future that you’ve worked with before, or who is best friends with someone you’ve worked with before. If you haven’t done a good job of making long term decisions, it will come back to haunt you.

Leaders Should Know What to Do

Leaders need to be prepared. Often times this is just a simple matter of thinking ahead. There are certain circumstances that you can see coming. For example, if you take a new position and soon realize that you will probably need to let a particular person go, you should be prepared for that possibility. You should have thought through the best way to handle it and most importantly you should have thought through the ways you are not going to handle it–ways that could create an even bigger problem.

Making decisions is a big part of leadership and the more intelligent your decisions, the better of a leader you can become. A decision made on whim is much less likely to be the best choice as compared with a carefully planned out decision made in advance.

Leading in a Specific Direction

Leaders have to know where they are going and constantly communicate this direction. This is usually referred to as vision casting. Some leaders run into problems because they aren’t very good at articulating their vision. Most leaders have problems because they haven’t really figured out what their vision is. They may have a few ideas of where they want to go, but they haven’t really sat down and worked out exactly where they want to end up and their rules for getting there.

It is much easier to follow someone who is unambiguous about where they are going. When someone hasn’t really put in the effort of developing a plan for where they want to go, they are difficult to follow. A lot of inexperienced followers will think there is a problem with themselves and they will try to compensate. To do this they will create their own version of the vision. Usually that version will be very biased toward their own goals and aspirations. This isn’t their fault–they are doing the best with the information they have been given. In the end, the highly motivated people all create their own vision each heading in a slightly different direction.

Imagine 25 people all holding the edges of a large parachute. The parachute is held tight so it doesn’t touch the ground. Each one has a general idea of where they are heading, but no real plan for getting there. One person is going to head straight toward the goal. Another is going to try to head toward the goal, but stay on the sidewalk, another wants to head to a couple secondary goals before reaching the final destination, etc. When these people try to walk they will have a very difficult time working together. Since everyone is headed in a slightly different direction, they will probably end up tripping over each other, letting the parachute drag on the ground and get dirty, and in the end everyone will be frustrated with each other. There will be a lot of time spent trying to figure out whose vision is the right one.

The problem is, this really isn’t their job. It is the leaders job to set the goal and the rules for achieving that goal. This doesn’t mean the leader doesn’t take input from others and it doesn’t mean that you can’t correct your course midway as new information becomes available, but you can’t leave leadership to chance. Individuals will create their own vision when one doesn’t exist. It is unlikely that your team will all create the exact same vision.

In most organizations there is always some degree of push and pull as people head in slightly different directions. The better you define and communicate your vision the more you can minimize the unnecessary friction and keep people focused on the goal.

Leaders Create Leaders

A good leader leaves a legacy of leadership skills in others. Well led organizations become even more well led because of this. It all starts at the top with the organizational leader. If you invest in the people under you, they will learn how to invest in the people under them. If you avoid making promises you can’t keep to people under you, they will be less likely to break promises to people under them.

Many times you will find an organization that is extremely dysfunctional in a particular area. When you trace the problem, it becomes evident that the problem started with leadership at the very top. Everyone else followed the example that they were shown and turned a small flaw in one or two people into an organization wide dysfunctional problem.

Leading on Purpose Summary

Leading on purpose is not easy. It takes effort and focus. You have to be willing to practice what you preach–and that does not come naturally to many people. However, by being aware of how you lead and the impact that your decisions have on others, you can increase your leadership skill and earn respect and leadership influence with others. The more you do this, the easier it is to function as a true leader and not just someone with a title.

This is an interview with three coaches that specialize in leadership. They generously offered to answer some questions about leadership and leadership coaching for Leadership501. The coaches are:

• Wilson Ramirez – www.leadershipwisdom.com
• Carl Robinson – www.leadershipconsulting.com
• Barry Zweibel – www.ggci.com

Read on for their insights into leadership.

What is the most common mistake you see made by leaders?

Wilson Ramirez:

The most common mistake is the assumption that people ‘have to’ follow the leader. This becomes the key differentiator between management and leadership: a leader is followed because people ‘want to’. Most leaders, unfortunately, forget this and act more often than not as managers.

Carl Robinson:

Not sufficiently attending to building relationships at work. Technical competence is overrated.

Barry Zweibel:

Just one?! How about three?!

1. With respect to ‘delegation and maximizing their leadership impact’ – Doing work that they’re capable of doing, rather than working on what only they are capable of doing. Too many leaders do their staff’s work instead of their own and then are left wondering why there are so many unanticipated problems and last-minute deadlines that keep cropping up. Job One of a leader is to keep a constant watch on the horizon, not to keep busy.
2. With respect to ‘consensus-building and collaboration’ – Thinking that the real work happens during meetings, rather than before, and to a much lesser degree, after, them. To paraphrase Walt Disney, if you can get them to agree before they disagree, they’ll never disagree.
3. With respect to ‘doing a good job’ – Trying to avoid risk-taking, rather than learning to how anticipate and mitigate the risks inherent in forwarding any new idea. As a leader, it’s not about playing it safe, it’s about making a difference.

What is the most important tip you can give for developing leadership skills?

Wilson Ramirez:

The first and arguably the most important step in the leadership development journey is self-awareness. Without a proper knowledge of ourselves, it is difficult to properly lead other people. Leadership requires a fine awareness of what other people are feeling, and the use of our own personality and abilities to lead them with/through/in-spite-of their feelings. Without knowing ourselves first, it is hard to know other people.

Carl Robinson:

You must develop your interpersonal intelligence skills. You have to learn how to influence people to make change. Simply giving people orders does not work. You might get compliance at the expense of buy-in and commitment.

Barry Zweibel:

Time is the ultimate scarce resource for an executive, so the ability to eliminate procrastination is an essential competency. Yet, many executives are still uncomfortable with talking to direct reports about performance issues. So they procrastinate (under the guise of being too busy to deal with that right now, of course) and as a direct result, time passes, problems fester, and things slide downhill. The most important tip I can give for developing leadership skills, then, is to learn how to be ready, willing, and able, to have those difficult conversations, when needed. That’s one of the reasons why I created an e-book called, “Employee Performance Discussions” which provides respectful, but powerful and compelling language and phrasings to help make those difficult conversations imminently less so.

What book would you recommend to someone taking on new leadership responsibilities?

Wilson Ramirez:

The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership, by John C. Maxwell, is just a jewel. It is so packed with wisdom, that I go back to it quite often.

Carl Robinson:

The Extraordinary Leader by John Zenger and Joseph Folkman

Barry Zweibel:

• Six Thinking Hats, Edward De Bono – better meetings
• Moments of Truth, Jan Carlzon – better choices
• Managers as Mentors, Chip Bell – better philosophy
• Executive Intelligence, Justin Menkes – better results
• The Art of Framing, Fairhurst & Saar – better communicating
• Leadership and Self-Deception, Arbinger Institute – better be careful

Which leader has had the biggest personal influence on your life?

Wilson Ramirez:

Although countless authors, speakers and leaders have had an impact in my life, the biggest influence would have to be Jesus. As a student and teacher of leadership, I find that the lessons he taught, his love, compassion and the consistent behavior displayed throughout his life are perfect material for a case-study on the topic, but also applicable at a personal level as a role model to follow.

Carl Robinson:

My high school Human Anatomy and Physiology teacher. He taught me to break rules and to be creative.

Barry Zweibel:

For me, I think it was John Madden back when he was head coach of the Oakland Raiders, from 1968 to 1978. I really respect how he took all the misfits from the league – galoots who had just couldn’t play nice with anyone – gave them a home, insisted they be themselves, and with owner Al Davis, challenged them to Just Win, Baby! Together, they won 17 straight games (across two seasons), won themselves a Super Bowl, never had a losing season, got Madden voted AFL Coach of the Year, gave him the best winning percentage of any coach in NFL history with over 100 wins, and a permanent seat in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

My Lessons Learned from it all?

1. Be curious about people rather than being in judgment of them
2. Don’t be afraid of creativity and counter-intuitive thinking
3. People love, but also need, to do Important Work – so let them
4. Respecting someone for who they already are, builds regard, rapport, and the ability to create some incredible magic

Who can benefit from leadership coaching?

Wilson Ramirez:

Anyone, really. Just like any athlete would benefit from a coach, any individual that desires to perform, obtain guidance or move to the next level (whatever that is) can benefit from a coach. I would particularly recommend coaching to people that feel stuck in their lives or careers, or those taking on an overwhelming challenge.

Going back to the most important tip for leadership development described earlier, the most important value a coach brings is the ability to ask good, hard, deep and thought-provoking questions that facilitate self-awareness — and to serve as an implementation monitor to ensure those lessons we discover are properly acted upon.

Carl Robinson:

Any executive who wants to stretch and grow and is willing to be open, honest and work hard.

Barry Zweibel:

The type of people who can benefit the most from leadership coaching are the ones who, notwithstanding the fruits of their labors, know they can still do better, want to do better still, and are willing to do the necessary legwork to make it so. They tend to be smart, capable, informed, creative, and caring. But whether they’re an up-and-coming star, a proverbial executive’s executive, or someone in between, they know that what brought them success in the past will likely be insufficient in sustaining their success in the future. So they’ve made it a personal and professional priority to continue to learn and grow and develop and stretch and question and consider and understand as much as they can. Regardless of circumstances or contexts, they want to be at their Absolute Best as often, and as consistently, as possible. Why? Because it’s at that level that the magic happens most regularly.

Describe how your coaching sessions works.

Wilson Ramirez:

Our focus is in understanding the innate and natural abilities of our clients. We spend a huge amount of time understanding their personality, their wants, needs and desires. We use thorough assessments to obtain metrics on different areas of their personality, and follow a clear methodology of discovery. We found that this discovery alone brings unprecedented value to our clients. Knowing their individual strengths and areas for improvement, we focus on the future and what they want to accomplish. We challenge them on specifics and help them think how their strengths could help in a given situation. We help our clients strategize about how to do the best they can with their natural abilities, and whether and how to acquire new skills to balance out and achieve greater levels of performance. We do not motivate our clients: the motivation comes from within.

Carl Robinson:

Refer to my website for greater details but … In a nut shell:

1. Assess
2. Action Plan
3. Practice
4. Refine
5. Practice more.

You have to do a proper assessment. Find out what your strengths and developmental needs are which usually entails conducting some type of multi-rater (360) feedback survey plus a personality assessment by a consulting psychologist (the only folks really trained to do assessment well). Then we develop a plan of action and concentrate on the 2 – 3 key things the candidate needs to learn. Then we find real-time – in the their business opportunities to practice the new skills. As we do this we ask for feedback so that we can determine if we are making progress and make any necessary adjustments/refinements. Change does not happen over night and takes ongoing practice. We keep at it until the candidate has incorporated the new skills.

They can expect to have me be very direct, pragmatic and supportive. I act as their advocate and cheerleader while keeping them focused on their goals.

Barry Zweibel:

Here’s a simple diagram of the process, courtesy of an article published by the American Society of Training and Development.

The idea is that the executive shows up for the coaching call (I work mostly 1-on-1, via telephone) with whatever issues s/he is grappling with and we dig in. My job is to listen – to what’s said, to how it’s said…and to what’s not being said – and then help create a clarity and confidence around moving forward. These conversations are completely confidential and solely for the executive’s benefit. As a result, the things that need to be talked about can be talked about – without fear, judgment, or restriction of content. Tempo-wise, these 50-to-55 minute, weekly/biweekly, coaching conversations tend to be crisp, focused, engaging, and highly-interactive, each one fully-customized to issues at hand.

What is the first step someone should take if they are interested in your coaching services?

Wilson Ramirez:

Get in touch with us. Visit our website for more information on our programs. Send us an email to info@leadershipwisdom.com or give us a call at (416) 284-1799. We would be pleased to discuss whether and how we can be of help for your specific situation.

Carl Robinson:

Go to my website and read in more detail what the typical coaching process looks like. And… Look at my testimonials. Call me with your questions.

Barry Zweibel:

For more information, visit my website; read some articles; read my blog; call (847-291-9735) or email (info@ggci.com) to set up a time to talk. Thank you.

Writing is an important leadership skill that is often overlooked. It is unlikely that you will ever see writing at the top of any list of important leadership skills. For a leader to be effective they must communicate their outlook, vision and worldview to the people they are leading. A leader who cannot communicate well using written words is going to be severely handicapped.

Another reason leaders need to write is to help them develop and clarify their ideas. Much of what makes someone a good leader is his or her viewpoint and perspective. Someone who makes good decisions usually does so because of how they look at problems. Someone who instinctively does the right thing will often have a difficult time explaining their decision-making process to others.

A leader who doesn’t take the time to develop and refine ideas and viewpoint can still be successful. But they will have a difficult time replicating their skills in others. You can’t teach someone to have the same “gut feeling” as you.

Leading Through Communication

It is possible for a leader to lead without using written communication. We have examples of many leaders who were unable to read or write. However, leadership greatly depends on communication and in modern times much of our communication is written. Written communication gives people a source to refer back to. If you only communicate verbally, there is no real standard to refer to if someone has a question.

It is also much easier to hold people accountable for something that you’ve communicated in writing. By putting your thoughts into words you give people a concrete standard that they can reference. Making your thoughts concrete can help align everyone’s efforts toward the same goal.

Clarifying Your Thoughts

Writing also gives you the opportunity to clarify your thoughts and better understand what you really think in your subconscious. Writing gives a leader the chance to privately develop their way of looking at problems in a way that can be communicated to others. In this sense, writing gives leaders a method for organizing and clarifying their thoughts. It allows them to take what they know instinctively and make it something concrete that can be conveyed to others.

This clarifying process can be immensely helpful in explaining strategy. Often a good leader will know what to do instinctively. However, the instincts of a single person are difficult scale for a large organization. Writing down the thoughts behind your instincts can allow you to replicate your skills in others.

The writing process can help you understand your decision-making methods in a deeper way. This makes it easier to teach your way of doing things to others. Often it will provide you with deeper insights into how you can make better decisions as well.

Writing isn’t the most important skill for a leader to possess. However, it is a very valuable skill to develop and practice because it lets you replicate and improve your other skills.

Leadership trait theory is the idea that people are born with certain character traits or qualities. Since certain traits are associated with proficient leadership, it assumes that if you could identify people with the correct traits, you will be able to identify leaders and people with leadership potential.

Most of the time the traits are considered to be naturally part of a person’s personality from birth. From this standpoint, leadership trait theory tends to assume that people are born as leaders or not as leaders.

There is a lot of value in identifying the character traits associated with leadership. It is even more valuable to identify the character traits that followers look for in a leader. These traits would be the characteristics of an individual who is most likely to attract followers.

However, the idea that leadership traits are inborn and unchangeable appears to be incorrect. It is true that many of our dispositions and tendencies are influenced by our personalities and the way we are born. However, most people recognize that it is possible for someone to change their character traits for the worse. Someone who is known for being honest can learn to be deceitful. The whole idea of saying that someone was “corrupted” is based on the fact that people can learn bad character traits.

If people can learn bad character traits and become different than the way they are naturally through conditioning, it logically follows that they can learn good character traits as well. A person who is prone to being dishonest can learn to be honest. A person who avoids risks can learn to take risks. It may not be easy, but it can be done.

The book The Leadership Challenge identifies 20 character traits that are generally associated with good leaders. The top five traits are:

• Honest
• Inspiring
• Forward-Looking
• Competent
• Intelligent

These are all traits that someone can learn to implement. It may not be easy, but with practice you can become more inspiring, with practice you can become more honest, with practice you can become more competent.

What makes this less difficult than it first seems, is that these are character traits that followers are looking for in a leader. By simply displaying these character traits more consistently an individual is able to change how they are perceived. Sometimes it isn’t a problem with changing your internal characteristics—it is just an issue of displaying those characteristics more openly.

By focusing on your own character and developing traits associated with leadership, you can increase your ability to lead.

Functional leadership is model that concentrates on how leadership occurs, rather than focusing on who does the leading. It defines the types of behaviors that guide an organization and then looks at how those behaviors occur. Under this model, leadership is a distributed function. People at all levels can participate in guiding the organization. One of the cornerstones of this leadership model is its focus on how instead of who.

This approach has some tremendous advantages. The models that focus on who leads tend to look at the person with formal authority in an organization. In many situations, the person with formal authority is not the real leader. Sometimes there is no single “real” leader. Even an organization that appears to be floundering is being led. People are still making decisions and forming opinions.

The functional leadership model looks at how these types of decisions are being made—even when there is no single person who is acting as a leader. By focusing on the function of leadership, it is easier to see the stimuli that are actually influencing the behavior of the organization—even if the input is coming from informal and unlikely sources.

Functional leadership is often used to describe job positions where an individual is expected to take leadership responsibility without any delegated authority. In this sense, they are asked to take on functions of leadership by helping to guide a team or process without being put into a formal position. The up-side of this type of arrangement is that it can keep the individual’s focus on how to influence their team’s behavior instead of how to exert their authority. The down-side is that it can result in inefficiency because they may not have the authority to make needed changes.

John Adair’s “three circles” have heavily influenced the functional model of leadership. These three circles represent the areas where leadership functions occur. Those areas are:

1. Task
2. Team
3. Individual

In general, this model looks at how needs are met in these three areas. In most organizations, the formal leader meets some of the needs in these three areas. Some needs are met by individuals who are taking on the leadership function even if they have no formal leadership role.

By identifying the need areas, a list can be formed showing the things that must happen for leadership to occur. By looking at where these things are occurring in a functioning system, you can gain insight into the actual process that is taking place without being misled by the titles and formally assigned roles.

The last 20 years has seen an incredible increase in technology. Most of the principles of good leadership remain the same, regardless of how technology changes. However, technology presents new challenges for leaders.

Virtual Contact Leadership

One of the benefits of modern technology is the ability to communicate with anyone anywhere in the world. While this is a benefit for businesses looking to expand, it presents unique challenges for leaders. Many leaders have a leadership skill set that relies heavily on their personality and “presence”. Many of these skills don’t translate well into electronic communication.

Leaders need to be aware of this and work to improve their skills in communicating and leading using modern tools. They can no longer rely on the power of their personality to give them an edge. One of the biggest areas leaders must develop is the ability to communicate well through the written word.

In the past, leaders were often able to rely on assistants for written communication. However, with the ubiquitous use of email, this is no longer an option. Leaders who cannot communicate well in writing will find themselves at a disadvantage.

Leaders preparing for the future should make a conscious effort in the following areas:

• Developing strong writing skills.
• Understanding different forms of electronic communication.
• Understanding the culture of different forms of electronic communication.

Leading Outside the Organization

In the past, leaders generally led people who reported to them through the chain of command. As businesses become more focused on their core competencies, leaders are finding that many of the people they are leading are in other organizations. Leaders of the past who lead through position and title will find it difficult to lead in the future. Many of their old techniques will not work across organizations’ boundaries.

This shift will require that successful leaders of the future develop a greater degree of true leadership skill. The shortcuts used by many in authority will not work when trying to lead across organizational boundaries.

Leaders in future organizations will also require a better holistic understanding of the entire business ecosystem, not just their organization. Leaders who can successfully make this transition will be in high demand, not just by companies looking to hire their skills, but by organizations looking to partner with them for mutual benefit.

The Difficulty of Earning Leadership Trust

Some of the recent high-profile scandals in business will require some changes for leaders of the future as well. Subordinates are less likely to trust a leader because of position and title than they were 10 years ago. In the future, obtaining trust will require even more effort.

In the future, leaders must seek to actively measure the level of trust in their organization and take deliberate steps to improve the level of trust. Before making big changes leaders must gauge the level of trust in their organization to make sure they have built enough of a solid trust foundation to obtain successful buy-in.

While the core skills of leadership will remain the same over time, the leadership of the future will require a different emphasis on particular skills. By preparing for these changes ahead of time, leaders can ready themselves today for what organizations will need tomorrow.