The first guy to raise his hands and assume the title of leader isn't always the right guy. He's perhaps the most aggressive. He's definitely conditioned himself to think that he's a leader. He's been rewarded previously for volunteering early. This guy usually has made a habit of this. But real leadership is not granted by virtue of nominating yourself.
If it were easier to find the right guy simply by seeing who speaks up first, we would not have Barack Obama as President of the United States. We'd have Mike Gravel instead. Obviously, it just isn't that simple. As you can see, this argument seems to work well in a political setting or within SAMBA where, amongst the fellows, no one owns the agenda.
In private enterprise however, where an entrepreneur is usually the first and only one to step up - there is a clear leader by default. He's staked his future and what little risk capital he has to own the agenda. He can fail or succeed but the buck stops with him because he put up the bucks!
If you're in a situation where everyone is "created equal" - be skeptical of the one who always jumps to be first to nominate himself. The selective leader understands when he can be effective - his recognition of timing comes from an understanding of his true strengths. He knows when it's his turn to be most impactful. Doesn't that imply that he's also the best marketer? He isn't trying to be all things to all people all the time - only when relevant.
Comments