Those who don't want to lead are the best leaders

[Ben Dalton]

Who remembers a quote from what I think was an Asimov story that the people you want to lead are the ones that are most resistant to being leaders.

 

[J Riff]

So all I have to do is not try? Excellent, I'm good at that! )

 

[Stephen Palmer]

Similar to Douglas Adams' observation that those keenest to be in power are those least suited to it.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I don't know of any Asimov quote about leadership, and I've got a pretty extensive library of them.

 

[Brian G Turner]

the people you want to lead are the ones that are most resistant to being leaders.

I don't know of any Asimov quote about leadership, and I've got a pretty extensive library of them.

Perhaps it was "read" instead of "lead", ie, "the people you want to read are the ones that are most resistant to being leaders"?

 

[tinkerdan]

The real leader has no need to lead — he is content to point the way.
Henry Miller, "The Wisdom of the Heart" in The Wisdom of the Heart (1941).

But I like this attitude better::

"If it's a good idea, go ahead and do it. It is much easier to apologize than it is to get permission."
Admiral Grace Hopper, as quoted in Built to Learn

He led his regiment from behind -
He found it less exciting.
But when away his regiment ran,
His place was at the fore, O.
~W.S. Gilbert

“It is a curious thing, Harry, but perhaps those who are best suited to power are those who have never sought it. Those who, like you, have leadership thrust upon them, and take up the mantle because they must, and find to their own surprise that they wear it well.”
― J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

“Only one man in a thousand is a leader of men -- the other 999 follow women.”
― Groucho Marx

@Brian Turner
“Not all readers are leaders, but all leaders are readers.”
― Harry S. Truman

“Lead me, follow me, or get the hell out of my way.”
― George S. Patton Jr., Patton Principles


“Because sometimes the best leaders are the ones who have no interest in leading. Those are often the ones who are most interested in doing what is right, not what is popular.”
― Joelle Charbonneau, Independent Study

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I think that a leader who was truly resistant would do a half-hearted job of whatever it was that had to be done. So I wouldn't want someone who was the most resistant in charge of anything vitally important. On the other hand, people who are too eager for the task can be the worst choice. They already "know" what needs to be done and how to do it, and aren't willing to listen to anyone else or modify their plans. Or they just want the power.

In the SCA when an officer was ready to step down, they used to choose for their successor the person who showed "insufficient reluctance."

 

[Nick B]

The task of a leader isnt to create more followers, it is to create more leaders.


The best leaders are usualy those who step up to the task because someone has to, even when no one wants to.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

The task of a leader isnt to create more followers, it is to create more leaders.


The best leaders are usualy those who step up to the task because someone has to, even when no one wants to.

Sorry, no, the whole raison d'etre of being a leader is to have followers - without them, a leader ceases to be. And stepping up to the task isn't the focus of a leader - unless the task ties closely to their personal vision.

An interesting thought from @Teresa Edgerton and one we might end up discussing further in January ()

*dons anorak*

Does a leader who doesn't want to lead cease to be one? Not at all. Most leaders don't set out to be one (except those born into roles with leadership expectations, such as dynasties or royalties). Instead, they have a vision - a projected future and that is what a leader's focus is. Sometimes to get to that future requires power to be held, sometimes not (Muhatma Ghandhi and Mother Teresa, for instance). But even when a leader ceases to hold power he or she still holds the vision and, if that is strong enough and enough people believe in it, then they hold power of their own sort.

It is, actually, one of the areas I most like exploring in writing - what a leader really is. And often they're not showy and power grabbing (and those that are may not make the best leaders, depending on the vision they hold and if power grabbing is required for it and retains followers) but just people with a vision, or something in them that people believe in.

So to answer the OP, no those who don't seek power don't always make the best leaders - those who focus on their vision, irrelevant to the power that brings, generally do.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Long ago (after many bitter experiences) I made a rule for myself, "Never volunteer for anything." I've broken that rule from time to time, and almost always been sorry. (Which I think may have less to do with the rule than a habit I have of of throwing myself into things that are already in great disarray. I always think that with enough enthusiasm and hard work I can make everything better.)

Being asked to do something and accepting and be excited about it is, of course, a different thing than volunteering.

Or at least ... well, as you say, Jo, that might be a discussion for January.

 

[Nick B]

Sorry, no, the whole raison d'etre of being a leader is to have followers - without them, a leader ceases to be. And stepping up to the task isn't the focus of a leader - unless the task ties closely to their personal vision.

I disagree. And the quote wasnt mine, it was someone famous, i just cant remember who. If you create only followers, and not leaders, you have to do everything yourself. You need to lead people who in turn can lead others.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Long ago (after many bitter experiences) I made a rule for myself, "Never volunteer for anything." I've broken that rule from time to time, and almost always been sorry. (Which I think may have less to do with the rule than the fact that I've made bad choices about what I should volunteer for.)

Being asked to do something and accepting and be excited about it is, of course, a different thing than volunteering.

Or at least ... well, as you say, Jo, that might be a discussion for January.

But when you believe in something, you throw yourself into it. The excitement of being a leader isn't about holding power (unless that's what delivers their vision), or volunterring - it's about knowing, completely, where you want to go. And then singlemindedly finding the way to do it.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

But if there are too many leaders, Quellist, there is going to be chaos and people working at cross purposes. A good leader is someone who knows how to delegate and to choose the right people to carry out certain tasks and use their own initiative where necessary. That is not quite the same thing as making them leaders.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I disagree. And the quote wasnt mine, it was someone famous, i just cant remember who. If you create only followers, and not leaders, you have to do everything yourself. You need to lead people who in turn can lead others.

If you refer to most leadership models - especially those of the transformational school - what you look to do is create what Kotter refers to as the 'guiding team' (think Jesus' apostles) - they are your second tier who lead the believers to your vision. In that sense you're right, but that guiding team are never the leader, merely the supporting tier eventually needed. (Steve Covey is an interesting theorist to read on this, and how a leader must yoke up all the time, and how exhausting it is, and how they must pull in supporters to help pull the weight. But the vision still emanates from the leader.)

 

[Nick B]

I would rather have a team of people with the mindset of leaders, than a team of followers.

That, I believe, is the heart of the quote.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

And then singlemindedly finding the way to do it.

Not always so easy when it isn't something you can do single-handedly, and none of the people who made it go off the rails in the first place are ready to change, or are people you can replace.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I would rather have a team of people with the mindset of leaders, than a team of followers.

That, I believe, is the heart of the quote.

But herein lies the pig of the thing. I train leadership all the time and people think it's a magic bullet. Sure, some leadership skills can - and should - be enhanced. Communication, belief, EI etc etc.

But can you create a leader? What makes a Nelson Mandela? It's the nature-nurture connundrum but, whichever way we come down on it, true leaders are a rarity and can't be easily replicated. Sure, I can tick the skills boxes but I can't set up the circumstances and values that collide and make one (Bob Geldof), or the humanitarian vacuum (Mother Teresa) or just the s**t hitting the fan moment that needs someone with the right skills to take charge (Moses?).

The answer, sadly, is there is only room for so many leaders and, in every team, you can only have one shaper - holder of the vision (which the leader fills).

So, sure, good to have a team with leadership skills but not a team full of leaders because that's an imbalance that will fail.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Not always so easy when it isn't something you can do single-handedly, and none of the people who made it go off the rails in the first place are ready to change, or are people you can replace.

No. And that's when you need your supporters and team around you. You deliver the vision - they provide the support to do it. A leader on their own will always struggle to acheive the goal - which is why is comes back to followers and a team to guide and support them.

 

[tinkerdan]

Take your pick.

“The function of leadership is to produce more leaders, not more followers.”
— Ralph Nader

Leaders don't create followers, they create more leaders.
Tom Peters

True leaders don't create followers, they create more leaders.
J.Saklya Sandifer

“True Leaders don't create followers, they create more leaders”
― Ziad K. Abdelnour, Economic Warfare: Secrets of Wealth Creation in the Age of Welfare Politics

“Leaders aren’t born, they are made. And they are made just like anything else, through hard work. And that’s the price we’ll have to pay to achieve that goal, or any goal.” – Vince Lombardi

“The most dangerous leadership myth is that leaders are born – that there is a genetic factor to leadership. This myth asserts that people simply either have certain charismatic qualities or not. That’s nonsense; in fact, the opposite is true. Leaders are made rather than born.” – Warren G. Bennis

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I think this idea that people can turn other people into something they are not bothers me. Leaders may be made not born, but they create themselves: as leaders, as followers, whatever. Others may inspire them, or give them some of the skills they need, but the essence of leadership has to come from within. As does anything else worth becoming. We shouldn't be like clay for other people to mold. You could come up with a hundred more quotes that all say the same thing, but that wouldn't make it any more true. After all, people hear something that sounds very wise and they repeat it so that they can sound wise, too.

And to think that leaders must create more leaders is to devalue the work of everyone who does the everyday things, the non-leadership things.

Besides, where does it end? Leaders create other leaders. And to be leaders those new leaders must create more leaders. Who in turn create leaders, who ... Ultimately, who is left to take care of the small practical details when everyone is leading and looking for more people to turn into leaders? Even people who play the smallest roles have value if they take pride in what they do and do it well.