Probably not…we are probably not raising up a generation of leaders.
The reason is simple…we are raising up a passive, do-for-me generation. I may be the only person alive who has mixed motives about the current collapsing of the economies throughout the world…simply because, at least, someone will have to wake up and get with it!
For many years, to be a real leader has meant to be a jerk. Honestly, Bush did lead & Clinton did not. If you disagree it’s no big deal.
I was looking at an article today about this very topic:
Richard Attias: Our Leadership Crisis
www.huffingtonpost.com11/10/11
When people are fighting adversity every day they want politicians whom they trust, and if those don’t appear there is trouble.
Here’s the sentence that struck me:
That’s the thing about leadership — it’s far from easy. But it is those who are decisive and brave enough, who really manage a country or company, who will win — and keep — the confidence of the people.
You see, this is a bit of the flaw. If you win the confidence of the people you are a leader. Really? Let me end this theory:
* Hitler had the confidence of the people.
* Jesus did not have the confidence of the people.
You see, the confidence of the people is only one part of the conversation…and people can be oh so fickle!
Leadership has to do with what’s right and true…even if folks don’t see it. Now, that doesn’t rule out the value of having folks follow, but there is more to it than a following.
Here’s the way I want to suggest we define leadership:
“Leadership is providing direction to a better place.”
If people don’t follow, are you a poor leader? If they follow but you take them someplace awful, are you a good leader?
I’m concerned about our own children…are we teaching them about how to improve the situations they face, or are we teaching them to win the love of the crowd?
Both would be cool…but shouldn’t we start with what is right?
I dare you to comment 😉
Blessings,
Fred
More here: www.trimtabsolutions.com
