The curious case of the helpless led by the clueless

 

Much has been said about the state of leadership in our current climate.

Finally, after many months of hibernation, and lots of jostling, our esteemed parliament reconvened earlier this week. But it was like watching a busy, disorganised and rowdy fish market.

Our nation is in the throes of the most difficult and painful period in our history.

Yet our elected representatives have deteriorated to name-calling, mud-slinging, making accusations of each other and they just can’t bring themselves to be adult enough to find suitable solutions for the predicament we’re in.

For heaven’s sake, where are the real leaders when we need them most?

Are you, like me, also hoping for some knights in shining armour who will come and rescue us?

In case you are searching high and low for leaders capable of guiding us out of this mess, let me share with you some characteristics that we should be wary of.

These are traits that I have gleaned over the last two decades of working as a management consultant and leadership coach. Keep your eyes peeled for these sorts of people, before deciding if they can lead you.

If your leader can’t see what is so apparent to you, then they are likely never going to see it. The reality is that leaders without vision don’t inspire teams, motivate performance, or create sustainable value.

If you see a person with tunnel vision, and that their ideas are fickle, cross them off your list of potential people. One day they will say one thing, and you’ll never know for sure, if they won’t change their mind tomorrow.

Eventually, it will end up being a case of the helpless being led by the clueless.

Next on your checklist is to find out if the persons you have in mind, can actually lead themselves, first. If they have shown a lack of character or integrity, just drop them from your selection-sheet.

No matter how smart, pleasant, influential, or erudite they are, if they are prone to rationalising their own unethical behaviour, based on their current needs, they cannot be depended on.

Remember, if you choose optics over ethics, you can be sure that you are courting disaster.

Then you need to evaluate their performance track record.

Were they actually useful citizens in the first instance, to now be on your list of potentials? We know that no one is perfect, but if someone consistently fails at the things that they do, should you really consider them as leadership material?

Past performance is not always a guarantee for future success. But surely, someone who has tasted success in their career would be better at leading you now.

This is also why the best corporations in the world recognise potential, but always reward the people who actually deliver results.

Your next test is whether your candidates for leadership can communicate properly.

If a person gets annoyed or is baffled by the fact that people don’t seem to understand them, then there is a communication problem. You know these types. The ones who announce incomprehensible SOPs and make regular U-turns. This is what I mean, when I say they have a communication problem.

Regardless of whether you agree with their messaging, great leaders can communicate effectively across a multitude of mediums. They are active listeners, quick thinkers, and know when to dial it up a notch, or to tone it down a bit.

Let’s move on to the next item on my list.

Does the person vying for leadership actually understand what “selfless-service” means?

If someone does not exhibit cognisance of this credo, you can bet your last ringgit that they are going to be a terrible leader. If they make everything about themselves, they cannot engender the trust, confidence, and loyalty that is so needed from the people they want to lead.

Has your potential candidate an abundance of self-importance, conceit, and hubris?

You seriously can’t consider anyone who is too haughty as a leader. They will always pass the blame to others when things go wrong, and will eagerly take all the credit when things go right.

And the list continues…

In this quest for real leaders, we need to ascertain if the people we identify, have an “it’s my way or the highway” approach. Because the most accomplished leaders will tell you that their style is fluid and flexible.

They understand the need for contextual leadership, which is the ability to quickly recognise and adapt their methods to the situation at hand, while always holding on to core values.

If you see someone who remains in their comfort zone and is simply keen on maintaining the status-quo, we are going to be in for a bleak future.

At this juncture in our existence, we need people who can lead us through constantly changing landscapes and show a strong dynamism for innovation. These are turbulent times and call for leaders with the capacity to pull us all safely into the future.

So, say no to status-quo junkies.

If your potential candidate is someone who says “this is the Malaysian-way”, remember that a person of this ilk will allow our future to evolve by default, instead of taking the all-important steps of creating our future by design.

If a cultural reset is due, then we need leaders with the courage to do just that.

This deftly brings me to the last point on our checklist.

Leadership absent of courage is but a charade. Courage is not arrogance or bluster, but real bravery to break from the norm, and challenge established ideas.

We desperately need leaders who can make tough decisions; listen rather than ramble on; admit their faults; and stand-up for those who are helpless now, more than ever.

Any person who doesn’t have this type of courage needs to be cancelled off your list.

If we do not want to be the helpless led by the clueless, I reckon we better take all the traits in this list quite seriously. - FMT

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.