In developing a personal theory of leadership, the four most important questions to ask oneself are: 1) Is leadership something that comes from within or that happens as a result of external factors; 2) Is leadership a role that everyone must take on or aspire to during the course of their lives/professional careers; 3) Does leadership come naturally to some and not others; 4) How does a person become a good leader?

There is an adage: “Some men are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them.” — William Shakespeare. How one interprets this adage depends in part on whether or not one believes that “greatness” is a self evident trait or one inherent in a calling or post; as well as whether or not the greatness that is mentioned is in fact a reference to leadership or power (they are not always the same thing).

Before I can answer that question I need to establish the definition of leadership as I understand it. Simply stated, a leader is someone who sets direction in an effort and influences others to follow that direction. At some time in everybody’s life they are called upon to exercise leadership. As parents we are tasked with providing leadership role modeling for our children; as teachers… our students; as a team captain…our team; etc. A maverick is by definition not a leader having no follower base to influence. Having not grasped that subtle difference in definition may have resulted cost the Republican Party a victory in the last presidential election.

In all fairness the difference between the two is clear but the dynamic which creates the difference remains elusive. Is it possible for one to start out as a maverick but end up a leader? Absolutely. How many times does this occur naturally (without the element of assigned power)? Not many. In fact is usually the person in tune with the wants and desires of their potential followers, and possessing an awareness of group dynamics that usually ends up with the leadership position, as well as an ability to communicate their solution to the problem facing those followers.

Let’s look at Shakespeare’s quotation part by part:
• “Some men are born great.”
In Shakespeare’s time, that would likely have meant that some men, through no effort of their own, are born to privilege and given power over men. A more modern interpretation of that phrase would be the notion that the cream rises to the top naturally and a person in a position of leadership is one who naturally deserves to be there given their innate qualities of goodness.
• “Some achieve greatness.”
In Shakespeare’s time, that would likely have referred to that emerging class of men who dared to “change their stars” or challenge the status quo and “win” a place among the elite due to the strength of will, courage of disposition, and sense of noblesse oblige. A more modern interpretation would be a person who against social, cultural, and intellectual odds devises a solution to a societal problem, develops the social skills necessary to personally convince a significant party of followers to collaborate in a joint effort or mutual direction.
• “Some have greatness thrust upon them.”
The quote by Shakespeare represented a new notion for the day that sometimes in the life of an individual they may be (again, through no power of their own) faced with or tasked with an opportunity to exercise a position of power to which they had neither been born nor one which they had themselves earned. How one conducts themselves under such circumstances is the true testament of a person’s character.

The first piece of advice Shakespeare gives to one in such a position is to “never fear.” But what does that mean…never fear? But what does that mean? To answer that I am going to quote a few more of my favorite quotes by great men who in their lives had greatness thrust upon them.

“There are no great men, only great challenges that ordinary men are forced by circumstances to meet.” — William F. Halsey

“The price of greatness is responsibility.” — Winston Churchill

“Let us consider the nature of true greatness in men. The people who can catch hold of men’s minds and feelings and inspire them to do things bigger than themselves are the people who are remembered in history. . . . those who stir feelings and imagination and make men struggle toward perfection.” — Henry Eyring

“Recipe for greatness — To bear up under loss, to fight the bitterness of defeat and the weakness of grief, to be victor over anger, to smile when tears are close, to resist evil men and base instincts, to hate hate and to love love, to go on when it would seem good to die, to seek ever after the glory and the dream, to look up with unquenchable faith in something evermore about to be, that is what any man can do, and so be great.”– Zane Grey

It seem then that in the opinions of these men the position of leadership is not to be feared but rather to be viewed as an opportunity for personal (and professional) growth and development. Fear of the position could lead one to make decisions that are rash or counterproductive, or worse to paralyze one into making no decisions at all. The cultivation of a clear and rational mind that is open to possibility, and a soul that is imbued with genuine concern for solutions to the problems that face our world, humankind, and our workplaces, the people in their charge; and an eye single to the goal, those are the essential qualities of a true leader.

As Shakespeare and James Herbert would both agree:

“[a leader] must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.” – Herbert, Dune

In the days following the collapse of the World Trade Centers, President George W. Bush found himself thrust into a position of global leadership. One to which he was neither elected, nor had yet earned. The jury is still out on whether or not his leadership was affective in a global context or whether his maverick “leadership” style had alienated more people than it attracted. I have my personal opinion on the subject but it is a topic for different venue.