A Link in the Chain: The essence of leadership

Leadership is a process whereby a group is brought to reassess its values and priorities. This post adds a few more thoughts on the essence of leadership.

In a previous post I challenged the notion that Israel is subject to a crisis of leadership. I argued that we are experiencing a crisis of trust with people in positions of authority. In this post I would like to add a few more thoughts on the essence of leadership.

The distinction between leadership and authority is based on the work of Ron Heifetz of the Center of Public Leadership at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government captured in his book Leadership without Easy Answers. Ron is my teacher. His theory underlies the work of the Reut Institute. First, according to Heifetz, leadership is an activity and a process whereby a group is brought to reassess its values and therefore also its priorities.

Second, we do not elect, nominate or appoint people to be 'leaders' but to hold positions of authority such as Prime Minister, ministers, generals, law enforcement people, teachers, CEOs or rabbis. Some of them turn out to be leaders because the engage in the activity of 'leadership'. Others don't. Not every person in position of authority is a leader; not every act of leadership comes from people in positions of authority.

Third, sometimes leadership comes from a position of no authority such as from the non-government or business sector, from religious people or from individuals.

Fourth, the activity of leadership mandates substantive engagement with long-term processes of change of people's values. To be a leader, one has to understand the present makeup of values and to challenge them.

Fifth, it is a risky business to be a leader. Every force working to change the present equilibrium of values and priorities creates an anti-force to restore and preserve the equilibrium. Most often, creating something new requires disengaging from the old. As one value rises another value declines. The Austrian economist Schumpeter called this "constructive destruction". This anti-force will want to marginalize whoever is disrupting the status-quo or even metaphorically or physically kill him or her. Moreover, a leader may fail or his success may only be appreciated years or decades later and after he is gone.

Sixth, political and societal structures impact the ability to lead from positions of authority or from positions of no authority. For example, in Israel the short and unstable tenures of government and the fragmentation of the legislature and the executive render leadership from positions of political authority very difficult. Thus, it is not surprising that leadership from positions of bureaucratic authority or from the non-government sector is more likely.

An essential condition for leadership from a position of political authority such as from an elected government position is long and stable tenures and a certain degree of congruency between the identity of the decision-maker, the legislative and the executive branches. In their absence, such leadership is rendered unlikely.