As some comments have mentioned, many people have learned leadership from two sources: those that led them well and those that led them badly. Future leaders will need to recognize that their duty is to leave a legacy of evidence for those around them to learn from. The responsibility to lead has a long lasting footprint and the more we can get leaders to realize that their behavior is teaching others directly, the more we can get that legacy right. Some additional points I’d like to add:

• Re: competition: For too long we have observed the development and presence of good leadership as a function of improving performance. Good leadership for the future is increasingly defined as a function of risk management. The threat to our performance today, in all industries, is rarely the traditional competitors we can see next to us. The frontlines of this new competitive landscape are being devised by people in their early 20’s, not people at the end of their careers. We need to be able to listen to the front lines of our organizations as the source of such intelligence in order to effectively manage future threats—and opportunities—to our business.

• Re: transparency: A current PhD student at Oxford studying the impact of “Ignorance” in the failure of strategies and projects has found that “ignorance” might not be so much about having the wrong information, but about not seeing the absence of required facts. Clarity becomes the ultimate condition for success in times like these. The more people have information on their technical tasks as well as the environment that they are working in, the more likely they are to adapt and question and contribute to testing that environment. Leadership must create this clarity.

• Re: leadership: Overall, we have found that when alternative paths are offered to leaders they find it is easier to say “I don’t like that path” than say “I don’t understand that path.” Humankind’s natural tendency is to refrain from a path that requires a change in our formula for success, or a diversion from the path we had been on. With As One are looking to build confidence in leaders to constantly seek new paths. This takes a moral courage and humility higher than we have ever demanded from leaders in the past. It means we now see the rise of a new competence in leadership: the ability to learn.

Best regards,
Stephen Langton

Loved your notion of leadership about people, and their sense of belonging to their group – the strong shared identity among members of their group – and productivity.

Yes, I also agree that with a common interpretation about how to work together, leaders can cross pollenate great ideas, inspire commitment to achieving defined goals.

Jim, thanks for the ways you’ve linked these three and articulated it so well – to help unleash the full potential of people. What a refreshing take for an innovation era!

His reference to leadership as “evolving” reflects the kind of openness that’s needed to navigate in these changing times. I also respected the underlying humility that pervades his attitude and approach while still reflecting strong confidence and and a clear vision. Growing from 170,000 to 250,000 will be no easy feat, yet I get the sense that he’s the type of CEO who will be able to make that happen with his skills and approach.

I agree that trust is powerful and transformative quality. Trust is a catalyst for success, and people who don’t receive the benefit of trust simply cannot reach their full potential. Thanks for sharing Terri.

Hi Johan:

I find myself actually agreeing with you on all points…a rarity – you should be concerned 🙂

Thanks for the clarity of your observations.

Great insights Tanveer. Whether emotional, philosophical, experiential, or relational, assumptive bias is dangerous if taken in vacuum. Used a part of a validation process assumptive reasoning can add some value, but as the basis for the entirety of a decision assumptions have been the root cause of many a train-wreck. Thanks for sharing Tanveer.

This is a great interview; thanks for bringing it to my attention. Mr. Quigley’s point about not using assumptions over tangible data/information is a critical one, especially if one hopes to lead others by fostering a culture of trust and respect. It’s easy for both leaders and employees to make assumptions about certain decisions or why a given project is being pushed/shelved based on what (little) information they have at the moment.

By demonstrating that you only respond to situations from a position of clarity and hard facts, along with being transparent about your decision-making process, leaders can foster a work environment where employees are not driven by self-preservation, but from the position of open collaboration to help their organization succeed in reaching their shared goal.

Thanks Mike for sharing Mr. Quigley’s insights on your blog.

This is a great interview; thanks for bringing it to my attention. Mr. Quigley’s point about not using assumptions over tangible data/information is a critical one, especially if one hopes to lead others by fostering a culture of trust and respect. It’s easy for both leaders and employees to make assumptions about certain decisions or why a given project is being pushed/shelved based on what (little) information they have at the moment.

By demonstrating that you only respond to situations from a position of clarity and hard facts, along with being transparent about your decision-making process, leaders can foster a work environment where employees are not driven by self-preservation, but from the position of open collaboration to help their organization succeed in reaching their shared goal.

Thanks Mike for sharing Mr. Quigley’s insights on your blog.

Thank you for sharing.
Using a unifying strategy to create a diverse, cultural acceptable, yet some how uniform approach – Indeed, the leadership challenge of the future.

It is refreshing to see a leader accepting “people are people – really?” and one who can see beyond the all encompassing ‘wisdom’ of the leadership team, by hopefully presenting human vulnerability and a quest for “ideas from every where”.

In my humble view “trust” is the new competitive differentiator – those leaders who have the trust of their people and their market – they’ll win.
When the market changes, as we know it is as I am typing this – they’ll win again.

Let’s never forget that leaders have to have a great balance between introspection and communication – the more senior, the more important this becomes. A self aware, competent communicator who has established a transparent environment with healthy feedback, comes close to being my ideal leader..

Leadership may be ‘learned’ when it comes to certain practical aspects. However, one who isn’t interested in building organizations, teams and/or relationships will be hard pressed to become a successful leader – no matter what.
The person must have the “innate capabilities” for him/her to be supported in this ‘learning’ process. If not, there are plenty of examples out there – good person – wrong job – catastrophic for all involved.