Fourth Classic Tenet of Leadership

Leaders control students and staff (educational setting) or all employees
 
Merriam Webster’s definition of Control:
1: to exercise restraining or directing influence over
2: to have power over

This tenet of leadership is the hardest for me to think about. My initial reaction to the word control is that is goes against my understanding of leadership in my realm of influence. The classic thought of controlling students, staff or all employees brings to my mind an archaic system of lordship that could easily be misused by corrupt leaders. Breaking past this initial recoil is my challenge.

If I was an elementary teacher, I would embrace this tenet since I believe that teachers do need to keep control of their classroom. And children do need to be controlled until they develop their own internal controls. But my perspective is from an adult educator training other adults with advanced degrees. And while I have control in my classroom setting, I do not control the learners themselves. I guide them, I mentor them, and I partner with them to help them to their goals. 
 
I think perhaps I would agree more with this tenet if the focus is on leaders controlling themselves. A good leader would lead by example, so self-control would be a factor in their remaining in a position to be followed. This thought would follow one of the definitions of control which is “exercising a directing influence” on someone. If you have self-control and are leading by example, you may have influence on others to follow your example. If you do not have self-control, others will not follow you and you lead no one.

Third Classic Tenet of Leadership

Leaders manage a rational system of management that takes into account structures, routine, outcomes, personnel and action.

So far my picture of a leader is someone who has the knowledge needed to lead someone else toward a specific goal and the capability of imparting knowledge to them. This next tenet speaks to how the leader approaches the goal. Managing a rational system of management means the leader would first need to understand what is rational and what is not. Possessing the intelligence necessary to understand the difference between a reasonable system of management and a non-rational system suggests the need for experience and a complete understanding of the situation.

A good leader needs to be able to look at a project in the big picture, taking in to account the possible outcomes and future impacts of their actions. They must be able to understand the social structure they are working in and the parameters of the routine or course of procedure. The structures and routines may be the more static of the considerations, while the understanding of the personnel tends to be more shifting and changing. A good leader should be able to understand the people they are leading, looking at their characteristics, levels of comprehension, learning styles and motivations. While leading, these qualities can change and a good leader must be able to recognize and adapt to the changes within individuals.

All these requirements together paint a picture of a leader that can multi-task, one that can concentrate on the goals yet simultaneously step back to see the whole picture and one that can adjust to changing situations. In essence, a good leader would be learning to lead while leading to learn.

The Next Tenet of Leadership

Leaders have superior expertise and information.

To examine this tenet of leadership I again go to Merriam Webster for clarification on the meaning of the words.

The meaning of Expertise:

1 : expert opinion or commentary
2 : the skill of an expert

The meaning of Expert:

having, involving, or displaying special skill or knowledge derived from training or experience

The meaning of Information:

1 : the communication or reception of knowledge or intelligence
2 : knowledge obtained from investigation, study, or instruction

In the previous blog I noted that in order to lead someone you must know where you are going. It is interesting that the first definition of expertise is not the possession of knowledge, but the ability to covey that knowledge with opinion or commentary. This affirms my previous blog stating that good leaders need to know how to teach, how to transfer knowledge effectively. Being an expert is not good enough. Possessing the information is not leading unless you can guide others to the same understanding. But is this always true?

I think this tenet is true if you are leading someone in an environment that makes use of the information that you possess. I could be an expert in one field but not be able to lead someone in another field unless my expertise was somehow related to their goal. Being a good leader does not mean you can lead in every circumstance. Perhaps being a good leader entails knowing when to lead and when to follow. And I think when a leader is following they are learning and attaining new knowledge that may allow them to expand their leadership capabilities.