Leadership, Power, and Service

It is a mistake to think of leadership as being the power of an individual to control others in order to serve his own agenda.   This is not leadership, merely manipulation, and it tends to be short-lived.    Leadership is a task, performed when necessary, in the context of a society.   It is persuading others to act for the common good, not the personal ambition of one person.

Every leader coordinates the efforts of a group of people.  Particularly when the task requires others to contribute their ideas and knowledge, not just perform simple tasks, the leader cannot give specific orders and monitor compliance, but must give direction and enable his followers to contribute in ways he does not prescribe.   An MBA who is not a computer programmer, yet must manage a team of programmers, cannot tell them exactly what to type.

The goals of a leader are very often not his own personal ambitions, but in service to others.  The CEO of a company holds a great deal of power, but that power is given to him by investors - and if he serves his personal interests rather than theirs, he will discover that the power he has can be taken away.  Those "leaders" who fail to serve their communities are not permitted to hold positions of authority for very long.

Leaders must also act in support of their followers.   Even their followers who have interests to be served, and when they are not served, they cease to follow.   Typically, a follower agrees to bear some hardship in exchange for a personal reward – the worker labors to earn his pay, or in some instances because he enjoys his role or the sense of accomplishment he gains from performing the work.   When the followers are asked to bear hardship and are denied any reward, they lose the inclination to follow and eventually abandon the leader.   His power to command is given to him by those who will obey his commands.

And this leads to the difficulty that leaders face: their power comes from multiple sources, all of whom must be served.   To serve the investors and ignore the welfare of the employees is to fail, and to serve the employees while ignoring the interest of the investors is also to fail.   The leader considers himself to be master, but has multiple masters that he must serve.

The difficulty for leaders is in balancing the hardship and reward for all parties involved in an undertaking.   In commercial organizations, the investors must part with their capital and expect a return, the employees contribute labor and expect financial rewards, the customers part with their money and expect a benefit, and so on.  A manager in the commercial organization must consider the reward that each party expects and the hardship each party will undertake to achieve it.   His own willingness and desire determine whether he remains interested in a leadership role – but that is only one of many competing interests.

There is no rulebook that will give the leader a clear path in all instances, nor any training that will enable him to act with certainty, nor any known means to determine how to fully assess the risks and the benefits.   He must think and decide. In general, the guidance to leaders is vague and identifies the priorities but offers little help:  it will tell him of the interests are to be served, but not how to mitigate among conflicting interests. Figuring that out is the talent of the leader, and the ability to do so is what qualifies him for that role.

So to remain effective at a leader means considering the interests of all – to set the appropriate expectations of the hardship they will endure, to demonstrate a willingness to provide the benefit for which they will endure the hardship, and to ensure that, when action is taken, the hardships are not greater nor the benefits less than he led them to believe.   Succeeding at doing so is the only way that a leader can retain power for an extended period of time.

It is also necessary for a leader to serve the interest of all.   An employee may be willing to undertake additional hardship without additional reward once in a while, but if his interests are never served he will soon lose faith in the leader and regard him as a swindler, manipulative and false.  In the same way, every individual affected by the leader must feel that, over time, the balance of benefit and hardship are acceptable.

In this context, it should be more clear that empathy is an important skill for mangers – it’s not about being “nice” or catering to the ego of others, but about considering the interests of others and ensuring they are served so that their willingness to follow can be maintained for the long term.   Leaders who lack empathy and do not consider the interests of others may be able to swindle them in the short term, but will not be able to sustain their willingness to cooperate – and as a result, will not be able to maintain their own power.