What Makes Someone A Leader?

Organizations often refer to the officers and the Board of Directors of their organization as their "leadership." Unfortunately, while many of these individuals are placed in positions of leadership, they are not leaders. Dictionary.com defines "lead" as "to guide by going before or with; to influence." It then goes on to say that when it is used as a verb, it refers to taking the initiative. Dictionary.com also defines "leader" as someone who "guides, conducts, is at the head of. Then Dictionary.com clarifies even further by stating that "leadership" implies "the position or function of a leader; ability to lead; act or instance of leading; guidance; directions." Therefore, based on the true meaning of what it means to lead, and thus be a leader, simply maintaining a position is merely a very small component of leadership.

Unfortunately, the reality is that very few individuals are "born leaders," and require training and hands-on experience to develop the skill set and expertise necessary to be truly effective leaders. Since most individuals in volunteer positions\, for any of a number of reasons, are often unwilling to take the time and put in the real commitment necessary to effectively lead. In the past three decades, I have notices that most individuals thrust into positions of volunteer leadership are well-meaning and well-intentioned individuals, with deep attachments and feelings for their organization. These individuals are generally people-oriented, and are proficient at what they do full time. Unfortunately, all the intelligence in unrelated fields, good intentions, and emotional attachments, often is insufficient to create an effective leader. Since most organizations have been unwilling to commit the time, resources, planning and continuity, required for effective leadership training, there are very few organizations that conduct and maintain adequate leadership training.

I have heard many "leaders" tell me that they envision their position as somewhat ceremonial, and believe that paid staff is the way to go. While theoretically that may sound like an effective plan, the greatest strength of many organizations, particularly small to medium sized ones, is the "personal touch." By and large, organizations are impacted to the greatest degree by the relationships and deference between leadership and members. With few exceptions, when organizations become staff oriented, they lose that "personal touch," which to so many of their members is one of the most essential ingredients. In addition, in evaluating paid staffs of organizations for three decades, the reality is that most paid staffs have weaknesses, and some have severe weaknesses. Paid staffs also have turnover, which harms development building. Another obstacle to being overly staff oriented is costs, because the less volunteers do and the more paid staff does, the more costly it is. In addition, most staffs of organizations suffer from the same challenges that volunteer leaders do - - insufficient and inadequate relevant training.

The optimum situation for an organization would be to train their staffs from the inception, train leadership at the entry level. mid-level, and elite level, and do so on a continuous basis. To be an effective leader, individuals often must "check their egos at the door," and not expect to be complimented for their hard work, but to often shoulder blame for anything that is perceived as going imperfectly. I recommend that anyone considering taking on a leadership position understand that one of essential necessities of a leader is the need for inner strength and fortitude.

Organizations require effective leadership, not just individuals who want to be treated as leaders. Leadership requires commitment, strength, and self-motivation. That is partly the reason that there are so few effective leaders.