Called to Lead

I don’ think you can train just anybody to become an effective leader. You can assist him or her to manage ‘a position’ that requires leadership qualities or even competencies but not a leader in the true sense of the word (I know I am going into contentious grounds here by saying that). A true leader is one who just leads. He doesn't try to lead…he simply leads. And, I am not even talking about charisma; though that helps too. Those who have a calling to lead don't stay in a 'position' of leadership although this may be bestowed upon them in many ways and forms. Rather they stay in a 'state' of leadership.

You can only make a leader out of someone who has a calling to become one. The challenge is – how do you measure a ‘calling’? Well, instead of worrying about how to ‘measure’ or in essence how to identify someone who has the calling to be a leader; it could serve your purpose better if you redefine what ‘leadership’ means for your company and your business. By focusing only on what I term as ‘classical leadership’ .ie. those who can lead with all the strength and refinement of a heaven-sent leader, you will be on a journey as epic in scale as the search for the holy grail. No, your company do not have that luxury. Instead, look at leadership from a more realistic levels. Perhaps you should look at the functionality of leadership more than the qualities of what is deemed to be great leadership. This would probably change your entire organizational leadership development interventions. Maybe even dramatically so and for the better.

Consider this. There are more than 1 type of leader or shall I say there are more than 1 type of situation in which a company may need leaders. A company may need leaders :

1. To lead the people (what we commonly refer to as executive leadership/classical leadership)
2. To lead strategy (formulation)
3. To lead strategy (implementation)
4. To lead strategy (follow-through)
5. To lead client experience
6. To lead the company’s knowledge advantage (those who want to be seen as leaders in their respective job-specific areas and may not necessarily want to be seen as executive/classical leaders)
7. To lead sales
8. To lead marketing (Yes! There is a world of difference between leading sales vs leading marketing and I am yet to see one who can do both equally well)
9. To lead the company’s ‘happiness index’ (individuals who are adept at keeping the peace and sowing the seeds of harmony and joy at the work place. It is better if the executive leaders can play this role but often times, they will need someone on the floor to do it. Those who are magnets for others to share and confide to are leaders in their own right and often becomes good change leaders too if given proper training and preparation.
10.To lead the company’s culture and values (those who constantly remind everybody else to keep true to the company’s values). These are the living brands of the company. Though they may be unfairly labeled as the ‘furniture’ of the company, they are in truth an embodiment of the company’s DNA. I have an amusing (and sad) story to share here : Some years ago when I was an independent trainer, I was involved in delivering leadership development workshops for a company that was incidentally going through a branding exercise. I got to know from my participants that the company had formed a 45 strong brand ambassadors who had the following qualities : female, young, pretty, ‘energetic’. The new brand values and promises of this company was around the idea of strength, stability and maturity. Right there in my sessions, I could have identified those who would have made great leaders of this type. No offense to the PYTs though. It was not their fault to begin with.


Lets take a look at the 1st type of leaders as this seems to be what we are all most interested in. Companies invest huge sums of money to identify, assess and develop those who are deemed as possible future leaders of the ‘1st type’. The results have been mixed. I suspect that the problem lies in the misconception that the 10 types of leadership are interchangeable and hence anyone can be trained to narrow the gap. So, if you have a super-performing R&D specialist, you can easily train and develop her to become an excellent lab manager (which involves much…much more than just researching, recording and analyzing data)….or so this thinking goes. It is not impossible for a knowledge specialist to become an effective executive leader but this is not a given. It is a lottery game. Failure rate is high.

So, as you might have guessed it by now : Right selection is the key.
There are some tell-tale signs (which are not scientific and I can’t defend this vigorously except that I have noticed these qualities in different settings and circumstances). There are some unique qualities of those who have a natural calling…a certain predisposition…to lead people and if viewed in tandem with more scientific and objective tools, there is a higher chance of making the right selection:

1. They are grounded. Their language is one of realism with a healthy dose optimism. They are able to show others how to reach for the skies while keeping their feet firmly on the ground.
2. They like to be involved (there is bound to be a slow progress from getting involved in everything and anything to selective and meaningful involvement without any sign of detachment for those things deemed not worthy of their involvement).
3. Exhibits a strong sense of personal values. I have said before that it is one’s professional duty to find a company that fits one’s personal value system. Those who have a calling to lead seem to be able to find jobs and companies that are aligned to their values. This value-alignment gives them the confidence and wherewithal to explore their personal boundaries of capabilities in terms of taking the risk of leading. They are also the first to leave when there is a non-alignment for extended periods of time.
4. They do not constantly tell stories of their past successes and their good deeds to establish their credibility. In the art and science of leadership, sharing truthful stories of past successes (and failures and the subsequent learning) are indeed an excepted strategy to build one’s leadership credibility. One with a calling to lead will know how much and how often this sharing should take place. For most effective leaders, their success lasts for only that moment. They do not live on past glories. They take their due credit and move on to new success paths.
5. Shares credit and keeps away from trivial and insincere praises.
6. Seeks out leadership tasks even without an official leadership portfolio or reason. They lead for the sake of wanting to lead to add value, to provide direction and ensure collective success.
7. Develops others in many different ways and often times beyond the call of duty.
8. Takes initiatives and explores beyond the boundaries of their comfort zone at the risk of failure.
9. Spirited and reflective and somewhere in between this continuum, they are constantly showing subtle signs of insecurity and self-doubt. This enables them to constantly improve and achieve better results while showing their followers their very human side.
10. They exhibit a fierce and determined sense of ownership.

So, for those of you good talent development professionals out there, remember that leadership development is as much an objective process as it is a wise decision. Decide wisely every step of the way and you may see the intended results that your company so richly deserve for such a huge investment of money, time and effort. I am all for objective data based selection and development process though I will not discount the benefit of a wise observation and judgement call.