What is the sign of a good leader? Number 1, he should be really hard to copy. Or in other words, mimic. I can assure you, there are going to be jokes and parodies made on you, after everything you do. So you better start with putting up ideas and visions so out of this world, that people should start thinking about jumping in front of an SUV on Delhi roads, before trying to mimic you. Before they want to copy your leadership style.
More often than not, leaders are chosen and not emerge as may be the general misconception. Leaders, are made out of people, who did not take a step behind, when "they" came asking for volunteers. It's pretty much a comic scene out any army movie, but then most creative ideas do come from real life mishaps. Since no one in their sane mind would step forward, if asked to lead a group of people, misadjusted, misaligned, for the sake of a vision that no one understands, let alone believe in, the person dumb enough not to run like a scared rabbit caught in front of an on coming train in a narrow tunnel, gets to lead. Once a leader is selected, everyone in the team turns into a paid stooge. We can easily imagine the kind of co-operation the leader would get, and eventually what happens to the leader from everyone "under" him. Since everyone else was smart enough to move back the right number of paces at the right time, rest assured they will always be smart enough to plan and be two steps ahead of the leader all the time.
Leaders aren't just done for from the side of people they lead, there are others baying for their blood too. Believe it or not, there are people in this world who would give an arm for the very post, one gullible individual was thrust into because of the smartness of a bunch of people, who in turn will, for the lifetime of his leadership, keep on outclassing and embarrassing him. The people, who want to kill the newly elected leader, will spread malicious rumours, false propagandas, just so they can lead in his place. They have a false idea of perks and charms of a position, but they are unknown of the truth that this position was created just to make sure, "they" have a fall guy.
So who is this, "they", being mentioned time and again. "They" are the ones who hold the actual strings in hands. Everyone is a puppet for them. Everyone is a piece on the chess board of corporate gaming, ready to be placed here and there, on their game plans and sometimes whims and fancies too. It's they who decide if the leader is to be executed or to be moved to a different role when the right time comes. No one sees them, for they hide in plain sight of everyone, working on their devious plans and executing them, as if its an act of providence and "they" too are just puppets in someone else's hands. Misdirection. That is an art they adept in. Beware of their charms as they know which buttons to press, so that people are ready to lay their principles and morals and accept what is being thrown at them. Leaders once selected and put in their respective roles have to be beware of such forces as well. For obvious reasons, oblivious to the larger game afoot, a leader is blinded by duty and faith in the vision.
Any person, especially someone one wants to get some work done from, won't work at all if someone were to tell them the stark truth. Lets take an example to get a better idea. Let us assume that you are a manager and you want to ask someone leading a team, for data on the work done, achievements, you would tell them their appraisal depends on how good they showcase the data. But the actual truth that you hide from them is that, actually they could've done whatever they wanted, no one above you is going to ask for a reason why you gave them a 15% percent hike, and that actually, its your arse that depends on how well they performed, because their doing their job well is well, their responsibility but motivating them to do excellent is your duty, not theirs. Next time try telling that to an employee and i am sure anyone in their sane mind would give you data that proves what a dumb manager you are. No that is why its always better to start building a scary story, about how the people above you are really worried about their work, how they should put in more effort, yada yada yada. Then you become a good manager.
Leaders and managers are therefore entirely different in their constitution. A good manager, can never be a good leader, and a good leader is always the one who can never manage.
Take a look at any political party, or for that matter, any team in the IT industry. "They" say that you should be a leader, not a manager, but actually 'They" want you to be a dumb idiot who does only what "they" want you to do, not get out of line, because they are and always have been good managers.
Hence when you start listening good things about your leadership skills, start running in the other direction like Ussain Bolt running after his gold.
This isn't a new phenomenon in the world, but this has been going on since ages, it happened in Greece, in Rome, it must have happened in Harappa too. It happens anywhere humans are involved, work is to be done, there is money and power to be grabbed by dollops, hence basically everywhere.
Just that, the corporate world lately has been catching on this tactic, especially the IT industry in India. Chronologically, the industry was set up by leaders. They were the original "they" with visions and ideas. Then they hired the foot soldiers to complete and compete with volume. Once they were unable to micro manage each aspect of their grand scheme, then came the managers. The new managers never had been leaders themselves but they were good copy cats. They copied the original leaders in everything, even about how to lead, and eventually become, "They" version 2.0, in the long run. And then started the phenomenon of choosing leaders rather than that of emergence of one. These leaders were in turn not actual leaders, since they were chosen by version 2.0 of "they", these were supposed to be puppets, so that "they" would never have to give up whatever they learned by copying and move into newer roles. But then as it has been happening all throughout history, there comes that one man, who turns out to be the wrong choice. Taking out the wrong choices and replacing them with more manageable resources, is quite the same as a gardener does weeding in his gardens. This was one thing which "they" did not have to copy or learn from previous versions. This they learned from the Theory of evolution, survival of the fittest.
The basic definition as comes out from a dictionary for a leader is,
One thing about Leaders has always been true, even without trying, they have always created leaders behind them, unwittingly, unassumingly. There will always be someone in their wake to step in to their shoes, to finish what the previous one started. But what the current trend suggests, what we see more and more happening is that the stooges are out numbering actual leaders, and this isn't a healthy trend for the industry.
More often than not, leaders are chosen and not emerge as may be the general misconception. Leaders, are made out of people, who did not take a step behind, when "they" came asking for volunteers. It's pretty much a comic scene out any army movie, but then most creative ideas do come from real life mishaps. Since no one in their sane mind would step forward, if asked to lead a group of people, misadjusted, misaligned, for the sake of a vision that no one understands, let alone believe in, the person dumb enough not to run like a scared rabbit caught in front of an on coming train in a narrow tunnel, gets to lead. Once a leader is selected, everyone in the team turns into a paid stooge. We can easily imagine the kind of co-operation the leader would get, and eventually what happens to the leader from everyone "under" him. Since everyone else was smart enough to move back the right number of paces at the right time, rest assured they will always be smart enough to plan and be two steps ahead of the leader all the time.
Leaders aren't just done for from the side of people they lead, there are others baying for their blood too. Believe it or not, there are people in this world who would give an arm for the very post, one gullible individual was thrust into because of the smartness of a bunch of people, who in turn will, for the lifetime of his leadership, keep on outclassing and embarrassing him. The people, who want to kill the newly elected leader, will spread malicious rumours, false propagandas, just so they can lead in his place. They have a false idea of perks and charms of a position, but they are unknown of the truth that this position was created just to make sure, "they" have a fall guy.
So who is this, "they", being mentioned time and again. "They" are the ones who hold the actual strings in hands. Everyone is a puppet for them. Everyone is a piece on the chess board of corporate gaming, ready to be placed here and there, on their game plans and sometimes whims and fancies too. It's they who decide if the leader is to be executed or to be moved to a different role when the right time comes. No one sees them, for they hide in plain sight of everyone, working on their devious plans and executing them, as if its an act of providence and "they" too are just puppets in someone else's hands. Misdirection. That is an art they adept in. Beware of their charms as they know which buttons to press, so that people are ready to lay their principles and morals and accept what is being thrown at them. Leaders once selected and put in their respective roles have to be beware of such forces as well. For obvious reasons, oblivious to the larger game afoot, a leader is blinded by duty and faith in the vision.
Any person, especially someone one wants to get some work done from, won't work at all if someone were to tell them the stark truth. Lets take an example to get a better idea. Let us assume that you are a manager and you want to ask someone leading a team, for data on the work done, achievements, you would tell them their appraisal depends on how good they showcase the data. But the actual truth that you hide from them is that, actually they could've done whatever they wanted, no one above you is going to ask for a reason why you gave them a 15% percent hike, and that actually, its your arse that depends on how well they performed, because their doing their job well is well, their responsibility but motivating them to do excellent is your duty, not theirs. Next time try telling that to an employee and i am sure anyone in their sane mind would give you data that proves what a dumb manager you are. No that is why its always better to start building a scary story, about how the people above you are really worried about their work, how they should put in more effort, yada yada yada. Then you become a good manager.
Leaders and managers are therefore entirely different in their constitution. A good manager, can never be a good leader, and a good leader is always the one who can never manage.
Take a look at any political party, or for that matter, any team in the IT industry. "They" say that you should be a leader, not a manager, but actually 'They" want you to be a dumb idiot who does only what "they" want you to do, not get out of line, because they are and always have been good managers.
Hence when you start listening good things about your leadership skills, start running in the other direction like Ussain Bolt running after his gold.
This isn't a new phenomenon in the world, but this has been going on since ages, it happened in Greece, in Rome, it must have happened in Harappa too. It happens anywhere humans are involved, work is to be done, there is money and power to be grabbed by dollops, hence basically everywhere.
Just that, the corporate world lately has been catching on this tactic, especially the IT industry in India. Chronologically, the industry was set up by leaders. They were the original "they" with visions and ideas. Then they hired the foot soldiers to complete and compete with volume. Once they were unable to micro manage each aspect of their grand scheme, then came the managers. The new managers never had been leaders themselves but they were good copy cats. They copied the original leaders in everything, even about how to lead, and eventually become, "They" version 2.0, in the long run. And then started the phenomenon of choosing leaders rather than that of emergence of one. These leaders were in turn not actual leaders, since they were chosen by version 2.0 of "they", these were supposed to be puppets, so that "they" would never have to give up whatever they learned by copying and move into newer roles. But then as it has been happening all throughout history, there comes that one man, who turns out to be the wrong choice. Taking out the wrong choices and replacing them with more manageable resources, is quite the same as a gardener does weeding in his gardens. This was one thing which "they" did not have to copy or learn from previous versions. This they learned from the Theory of evolution, survival of the fittest.
The basic definition as comes out from a dictionary for a leader is,
leader |ˈliːdə| noun
the person who leads or commands a group, organization, or country: the leader of a protest group | a natural leader.
That of a manager are slightly different,
manager |ˈmanɪdʒə| noun
[ with adj. ] a person regarded in terms of their skill in managing resources.
Leaders are the ones to give vision, lead, inspire. Managers are the ones to make sure leaders don't go overboard. Once the managers became,"they", leaders were not allowed to lead any longer.
One thing about Leaders has always been true, even without trying, they have always created leaders behind them, unwittingly, unassumingly. There will always be someone in their wake to step in to their shoes, to finish what the previous one started. But what the current trend suggests, what we see more and more happening is that the stooges are out numbering actual leaders, and this isn't a healthy trend for the industry.
