Discussion on:

Fill in the blank. A great leader is someone who___________

I'll start. "...someone who can admit their mistakes."

not afraid to get his hands dirty with the work of his employees

Who always believes that behind all his achievements there was a major role played by his hard working employees.

I've had the honor of knowing the very first Navy SEAL, CMDR Roy Boehm. He was tasked by President Kennedy to form this elite group of warriors. He served in three wars, WWII, Korea, Vietnam with Special operations.

CMDR Boehm is most unique idividual I have ever met. He inspires his men like no other. With him at point - I would follow him THROUGH the gates of hell itself without fear. The last time I saw him was well over 20 years ago. Recently I was able to talk to him through email - he hasnt changed a bit. Yes, and as you would imagine, still cantankerous at 80!

What makes someone like CMDR Boehm a great leader? I believe it takes a number of things to be a TRUE leader.

1. Integrity with his/her subordinates.
2. Courage to stand for the truth and what is right not matter what the cost. (and in the military, to even lay down your life for your men)
3. Care and compassion for those under you
4. The unique ability to truly inspire your subordinates to achieve more than they ever thought they could.
5. PRAISE in PUBLIC - CRITICIZE in PRIVATE

CMDR Boehm has written a book called "First SEAL", I would HIGHLY recommend reading it if you would like to see what a leader and a true Hero says about life. It may give you a fresh perspective on how to be an even better leader.

You can visit his website at http://www.firstseal.com/

During WWII, General Eisenhower walked into his war room and tossed a piece of string on the table in front of a room full of other generals.

He said "Gentlemen, that string represents your men. Push it and it goes everywhere but where you want it to. But place one finger on the end and begin to pull and it will follow you wherever you go. ... My point, gentlemen, is this: the troops are not willing to go where you are not, but they are willing to follow you wherever you lead."

Here here jspeed. The best leaders seem to have had military experience as they truly understand that respect is earned. You take care of your men and women, have good morales, and act in just cause, what follows is total dedication and loyalty by the subordinates.

I've known quite a few Military Leaders that were far more interested in showing you the fact that they were Military rather than be good leaders. I suggest that there are both good and bad on both sides.
Nuff said on"Military Leaders" in a civilian position. It might be agood idea however for the Military Leaders to remember that they are in a "Civilian" Capacity and should therefore not expect the same level of "yes Sir/no Sir that they would get in the forces.
The key word here is Civilian.
Aaron

A leader or I should say a great manager of employees is one that knows how to handle issues not in black and white (as most former military leaders do...and yes this is from experience people!) but know how to wade through the gray areas that most frequently arise.

I agree with the emphasis on the keyword 'civilian'. As someone else also has put it in this chain that the leader should not see things as 'Black and white' but as we are all shades of Gray, some more towards Black and some more towards white, people should be dealt with similarly.
What should be taken from the Military leaders though is the concept that the leader should be ready to 'fight for his men' (though not all military leaders are like that).

...makes sacrifices along with those who work underneath him. My director who reports directly to the CIO, (my site manager reports to a national manager and all three of us report to the director,) made it clear that he did not want a raise until everyone who works underneath him has received their raise.

As a result, he has secured my loyalty. He could have chosen to get a raise in his six-figure income. However, he chose to tough it out like the rest of us. I thought that was very admirable.

If the guy can't keep a promise to his wife, then how will he ever keep a promise to anyone else?

who understands the simple truth that happy employees are more productive.

...someone who knows what the people he's leading are actually doing.

A great leader is someone who understand the pulse of his entire team, leads the team in right direction and completes his responsibilities effectively and effeciently.

In business, leadership is ?the ability to influence employees to voluntarily pursue organizational goals.? Leadership is one of the many assets a successful manager should possess. While management is considered a position, leadership is considered a relationship. Thus, leadership is the connection between the leader and their subordinates that makes management successful. This connection can strengthen an organization and make the work more focused and effective. Leadership is the ability to get people to willingly follow. A person who exhibits the traits of leadership is called a leader. The role of a leader is to ensure that the desired tasks and guidelines are implemented throughout the team. Since managers can not be everywhere at the same time, leaders are put into place to bridge the gap while echoing managements requirements. Because leaders are the link between the team and management, they should show compassion and understanding of the team. Additionally, due to the higher frequency of interaction with the team, leaders can speak on behalf of the team for both the positive and the negative, assess the team?s needs, and relay this back to managers. Loyalty is important amongst leaders. Team members tend to be more loyal to their leaders than their managers. In part, this is due to the fact that leaders will accept the blame for when things go wrong, celebrating team/group achievements, give praise, and credit when and where it?s due. Managers? interaction with their subordinates is less than that of leaders. A manager is one who must be obeyed; a leader is one who people choose to follow. An effective leader understands that leadership is not just a trait; it is a responsibility.

A great leader is someone who "Creates Leaders Not Followers"

Apologies if this is repetition - so far every time I tried to access the existing posts, the site crashed !

Anyway, from a non-work source - I'd be interested to see if anyone can guess what field it comes from ! It is summarised from one or more article...

The idea of the lists is that you see how many you tick in each list - which gives you a steer on what to work on.

Cathy

~~~
Good Leadership Qualities:
Safety / Confidence / A Plan / Knowledge / Leadership / Security /
Clarity / Fun / Incentive / Consistency / Direction / Caring /
Understanding / Dependable / Empathetic / Calm / Adaptable / Flexible /
Patient / Trusting / Respect Fearless / Clear / Motivated /
Resourceful / Inventive / Imaginative / Empowering / Aplogetic / Goal
oriented / Focused / Mentally Athletic / Solutionary / Problem solver /
Persistent / Courageous / Predictably unpredictable / Predictable

~~~
Bad Leadership Qualities:
Frustrated / Upset / Inadequate / Confused / Unconfident / Mad / Sad /
Ashamed / Embarressed / Ignored / Insecure / Disempowering /
Perfectionist / Boring / Intolerant / Impatient / Discounted / Unclear
/ Unsolutionary / Dull / Rigid / Goal oriented / Blaming / Fragile /
Easily rattled / Scared / Frenetic / Nagging / Unpredictable /
Predictable / Lack of knowledge

A good leader absorbs, deflects, or rejects non-productive work so that his/her people can focus on getting the job done. You may not realize how important this is until you are in the opposite situation. It can sap the life out of a great team.

Manages the big picture while delegating the details.

A great leader is someone who will be followed willingly. A mediocre leader is one whi is followed be of mandate.

inspires others to achieve and become leaders in their own right also.

A quote comes to mind-

I must catch up with my people for I am their leader - Gandhi

I wish to keep this philosophy in mind when managing people.

Someone who lives in the present and yet envisions the future. Being humbled and encouraged by the past he or she is able to reach heights previously undiscovered.

The individual is a pioneer of sorts. Forging ahead through the rock and the clay hills of life. Plowing through the fields of opportunity with the greatest expectation of the soon coming harvest.

Instead of excepting "what is", there're always envisioning the possibilities. They inspire others to greatness.

Author Jim Collins covers the attributes of a Level 5 Leader in his book, "Good To Great". I think it's a great definition of a leader, worth mentioning, here.

Level 5 leaders:
- Set up their successors for even greater success in the next generation.

- Display a compelling modesty, are self-effacing and understated.

- Are fanatically driven to produce sustained results.

- Display a workmanlike diligence - more plow-horse than show-horse.

- Attributes successes to the team and takes responbility for the failures.

This book primarily deals with ascertaining how companies went from good companies to great companies. The primary reason for defining the Level 5 Leader in the book is to point out that at the pivotal point that a company went from good to great, there was a Level 5 Leader at the helm that displayed all of the attributes listed above.

Example and is not afraid to get their hands dirty. Would not ask people to do anything he/she would not do.

not FOR them.

Leader.

Servanthood of leadership must be felt, understood, and practiced in order to be faithful to those we lead/manage.

Leadership...

...has nothing to do with power...
...is balancing the needs of the people with the needs of the organization...
...is one-third inspiration and two-thirds perspiration...
...is a human trait, not a mechanical trait...
and
...requires a leader to be vulnerable in order to allow growth in others.

this was all part of my "command philosophy" when I led men and women in the military - it works because I believe in everything that I have written and practiced it diligently - my experiences in corporate america have been less than successful using this philosophy...

a truley effective leader is one who is not missed when gone. (ie. People are doing, what they are suposed to do, the same as if he were there, a true team)
One who never, ever, has to say "I'm in charge"! If you have to say it, you're not.

learns from their mistakes and empowers workers....

....get others to do what they would rather not do in order to achieve something they want to achieve.

Someone who gets the job done no matter the cost to themselves.

Good leader. Someone who gets the job done no matter the cost to their followers.

Leader is some one who injects potential to followers and made them to work which they conisder difficult in normal time.

[IF]

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you
But make allowance for their doubting too,
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:

If you can dream--and not make dreams your master,
If you can think--and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on!"

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings--nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much,
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And--which is more--you'll be a Man, my son!

for the refreshing journey back into wisdom.

.....President Bush.

which is not related to your opinion of the character of George Bush, but to your unwavering loyalty to him.

Quite some time ago -- it may have been 18 months or more -- there was a discussion about the US Constitution and the sovereignty of the individual.

In that discussion it was stated/declared/argued that it was the duty of every American to give their full support to whoever held the office of president at any given time.

So my question is: if Kerry had been elected instead of Bush, would you have supported him 100 per cent as you have done with Bush, and in the future maybe, Hillary Clinton?

Your silence speaks volumes. However please feel encouraged to answer the question if you feel that I have misinterpreted your lack of response.

...is that I didn't see the message.

I don't always check-up on every message that I posted in every discussion in which I've participated. Believe it or not, Julian, there comes a time when I simply don't visit my discussions anymore, and/or I don't really care to see if anyone replied to one of my messages. Unlike you (obviously), I'm not always chomping at the bit to see who posted a reply to something I said. The only reason I saw this one, is that I visited the IT Management section to check another thread I was interested in, and noticed this discussion as one I once posted something to.

To answer the question that you falsely assumed I was avoiding, let me put it this way. If any American president, regardless of party affiliation, gender, hair style, race, religion, sexual orientation, or anything else, approached the war on Islamo-Fascism in a manner that suggested, "we're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore", and waged that war as vigorously as possible, regardless of where it might take us, regardless of whatever criticism from whomever might result, absolutely yes, I would support him, her, or it. Unfortunately, I don't believe for a second that the current crop of anti-war Bush-haters would feel the same hate and opposition if Kerry or Clinton was doing the exact same thing that President Bush is doing. They WOULD support their guy.

Why in the hell is it so hard for you to understand that I passionately believe in the cause, which is the war on Islamo-Fascism, which the entire world has been ignoring since the early 1970s, and that I want to face it with the full might and focus of the United States -- and FINALLY, for whatever reason, we have a president who IS doing something about it? Actually, Julian, in my opinion, we're not doing enough! Why in the hell do you always make these stupid false assumptions? Why in the hell aren't you smart enough to read what I say, not read into what you think I said? I really have to wonder about you sometimes.

Julian, I'll debate you any time, anywhere. Why in the hell do you always come across as smug and condescending, and make such stupid assumptions as you just did? I've proved you wrong so many times I can't keep track of them all. I've shown so many flaws in so many of your arguments, that you usually resort to running away, refusing to read my messages, but still posting your smarmy replies on occasion. Get real!

By the way, you didn't reply to the content of my message either. Should I assume that "your silence" speaks volumes? Although I didn't ask a specific question, the fact the I saw President Bush in your very own Rudyard Kipling quote seemed interesting enough to solicit a response. (Although I didn't really care enough to check back, did I?)

By posting such a definition of leadership, you must secretly believe that President Bush is a "great leader" because:

He keeps his head when all about him
Are losing theirs and blaming it on him,
He can trust himself when all men doubt him
But he makes allowance for their doubting too,
He can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, he doesn't deal in lies,
(Note: The "lie" about "his falsely alleged lie")
Or being hated, he doesn't give way to hating,
And yet he may not look too good, nor seem to talk too wise:

And on it goes....

Leadership is not management. Good leaders can be awful managers, and vice versa. A good leader is wise enough to have a few good managers in tow.

I served in the Navy during Democrats, Republicans. Generally speaking, and IMO, Democrats do not understand foreign policy or the military. Republicans understand both, but tend to be weak on feeding the poor. Since the military is not interested in feeding the poor, by and large the military prefers Republican Presidents.

The Commander-in-Chief (President) has HUGE impact on the performance and morale of the armed forces. Any person whose ambition and motivation is, or appears to be, selfish (ie, Ms. C) is not going to get much support or performance. Oh, the military will obey orders, but that puts a huge burden on the President to THINK of all the ORDERS correctly. This happened during Jimmy Carter's reign; he micro-managed the military with disastrous results (failed hostage rescue, crashed helicopters in Iran). President papa-Bush, on the other hand, engaged an experienced General to kick the Iraquis out of Kuwait and left the strategy and tactics to the military. The result was impressive; almost disappointingly "textbook". By doing so, "leadership" was shown at several levels -- Bush established the vision and policy, but actually doing it was left to General Schwartzkopf, who in turn demonstrated excellent leadership using methods that many readers have already described.


There is no "leader" if nobody is following. If you want to know what leadership is, look around and see who has a large, willing "following". Then try to figure out what is pulling the crowd.

Some things seem evident: The leader must KNOW THE WAY. He or she is *leading*. The leader must convey a sense of confidence: "I know the way, you are better off following me as compared to someone else, or going off on your own."

What it takes to actually do that varies. I was taught six leadership styles in the Navy; each having a purpose, a time and place to use it. People that complain about the military were not in it long enough to enjoy the benefits of good leadership. It is fairly rare; but it is even more rare in civilian life in my opinion.

You pose an interesting question, Jardinier. On the one hand, we have Billary or John "I have a plan" Kerry as a potential president. On the other hand, the military have taken an oath "to defend the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic..."

Just as a side note regarding the Constitution and freedom of speech, during the Clinton (Bill) administration, military officers were threatened with a courtmartial if they were to speak up against their "superior" officer. Currently, we have military individuals harping against "W" yet we see no such form of retaliation.

A leader not only leads, but he/she is big enough to accept criticism. So as far as support goes, yes, those in (or us veterans of) the military will obey the lawful orders given by the president. There is nothing in the oath of enlistment that says we have to give 100% support. We are still free to disagree but with decorum. The fact that "Bill - depends on what your definition of is is" was NOT a leader, was reflected by the huge attrition of military during his watch (outside of those he basically fired through defense cuts).

Leaders do NOT raid the homes of our citizens (Waco or Ruby Ridge ring a bell?) and shoot mothers holding their children. (And don't go down the path of Iraq since you aren't there and only receive the Left-wing media slanted version).

Leaders do NOT lie (under oath or otherwise), do NOT commit purjury, do not commit treason by aiding an enemy country like North Vietnam, do NOT turn their backs on their troops (a la Murtha), or cowardly hide their faces a la Al Qaeda.

Yes, the military will obey the orders of the President whoever that may be. Unfortunately, there will be much fewer that will do so willingly under your choices.

Never, ever asks his people to do something he would not do himself.