Page 28 - The extraordinary leader

Demystifying Leadership • 5

new discipline. They then move to become more independent in their
work. From there, some people move into managerial positions in
which they oversee the work of others or move from a narrow focus on
their own work to a broader focus that involves coaching others to
develop skill and expertise. Finally, a handful of people become
pathfinders and visionaries who lead broad-scale organization change
and are the “statesmen” of their organization. Career stages are easily
confused with organizational levels, but they are not identical. People
who are promoted into managerial positions often continue to
function as professional, individual contributors. They revert to the
work they find most comfortable and never take on the role of coach,
mentor, or director of others. They continue doing technical work at
which they are highly proficient. However, the stage of a person’s
career is another variable of the leadership equation.
4. Leadership is driven by major events. Mayor Rudolph Giuliani of
New York was catapulted into the national limelight because of his
handling of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. Prior to
that, his career had been waning. Churchill had sought several
leadership positions, but it was not until the events of Dunkirk that his
talents were recognized. Through World War II he was a premier
leader, and then when the war was over, his countrymen voted him
out of office. When a friend suggested that this was a blessing in
disguise, Churchill growled back, “If it is, the disguise is perfect.”
5. The activities of leadership are not all the same. For example, not all
leaders are required to “lead change.” Some leaders spend a great deal
of time on people-development activities, whereas others are riveted to
the operational or production elements of their roles.
6. We confuse success and effectiveness as the general benchmark of
leadership. If success is measured by dollars and titles, that is clearly
not the same thing as effectiveness, or truly producing the results that
the organization needs. We believe this is probably best measured by
the feedback from subordinates who experience that leadership.
Much of the research on leadership makes no distinction between
success and effectiveness.
7. We lack agreed-upon measures, so it has been frustratingly difficult to
get agreement on who is a good leader and who is not. We lack robust
measures of leadership effectiveness and especially have no