Leadership: The Source of an Organization's Future

What distinguishes great leadership from those who are leaders by title is the way great leaders speak to their various constituencies – a way of speaking that generates possibilities, an enthusiastic following and a mood of excitement, an itchiness to get into collaborative action and make things happen – yes, even a cult like following making great things happen. (Think Apple)

It is a speaking that sources, or generates, or brings into existence a new bold future for his or her organization, and everyone the organization touches – and, it is a future the leader really, really, really wants.

It is a speaking that engages and compels - one that redirects the trajectory of the organization’s impact in the market.  It is a speaking we all have access to in those moments when we are in touch with our passions, vision and commitments – in those moments when our connection to our passion, vision and commitments is so visceral it has pushed aside conversations about feasibility, practicality, pathways… blah, blah, blah, that, so often derail even our most passionate intentions.

Great leaders recognize the default mode of most speaking is descriptive. They know the discussion in most meetings, or the exchanges of most commentators is simply the point-of-view, or opinion of the speaker, being spoken as if describing facts.

Leader’s speaking is sourced from the stand they are, independently from how they think/know people will react. Great leaders have mastered how to respond to peoples’ reactions to the future they want after they speak vs. conditioning their speaking before the fact so as to avoid push back or the clamor for certainty and agreement that follows the, “Yea but…” – they know how to reframe concerns and connect people to shared passions and commitments.

Reflect briefly about the leaders you admire and respect most – your Great Leaders Through History – and check for yourself:

1. Were they shaped by circumstances or their commitments?
2. Were they resolute in pursuing their vision or reasonable in the face of resistance?
3. Were they shaped by organizing principles or were they practical (political), going along to get along?
4. Were setbacks and excuse to change course, even give up, or were setbacks fuel for more imagination and creativity?
5. ...