“Do you wish to rise? Begin by descending. You plan a tower that will pierce the clouds? Lay first the foundation of Humility.” – St Augustine
We are all familiar with the stereotypical leader, the hard-driving, charismatic CEO who with confident bluster leads his company to greatness. But in reality, which type of horse is better able to get a hard job done…a work horse, or a show horse? Not surprisingly, the ‘show horse’ leadership style is often much less effective, and the most important trait of successful leaders is not extreme confidence, or showmanship, but humility.
Merriam-Webster defines humility as ‘freedom from pride or arrogance.’ But I like the definition I found in Urban Dictionary better: ‘to be humble is to have a realistic appreciation of your great strengths, but also of your weaknesses.’ Writing in the Washington Post (“Leaders are more powerful when they’re humble, new research shows,” December 8, 2016) Ashley Merryman shares the data: “True humility, scientists have learned, is when someone has an accurate assessment of both his strengths and weaknesses, and he sees all this in the context of a larger whole. He’s part of something greater than he. He knows he isn’t the center of the universe. And he’s both grounded and liberated by this knowledge…recognizing his flaws, he asks how he can grow.”
Humility as a quality in great leaders is hardly a new concept. In the 2001 classic leadership bestseller, Good to Great, Jim Collins defines Level 5 Leaders as “building enduring greatness through a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will…their ambition is first and foremost for the institution, not themselves.” For those of you who may not have read Good to Great, the book was informed by a long-term study by Collins and his team. They analyzed corporations who were just ‘good,’ and those who made the leap from ‘good to great.’ These corporations made incredible leaps from long term mediocrity into long term superiority. His team looked at all sorts of characteristics of these companies to try to understand why some companies made the leap and some did not. What they found about the leaders of these companies truly surprised them…they all seemed to be cut from the same cloth. They combined a striking humility with an intense will. During interviews, they never talked about themselves and often gave the credit to team members. In contrast, leaders of the companies who remained mediocre were often more concerned with their own reputation for personal greatness than that of the company and had a very “I-centric” style.
So why does the stereotypical hard-charging, more charismatic leadership choice still persist? As Jim Collins writes, “The great irony is that the animus and personal ambition that often drive people to positions of power stand at odds with the humility required for level 5 leadership. When you combine that irony with the fact that boards of directors frequently operate under the false belief that they need to hire a larger-than-life, egocentric leader to make an organization great, you can quickly see why Level 5 leaders rarely appear at the top of our institutions.” Unfortunately, one doesn’t have to look very far to see the kind of damage leaders driven primarily by personal ambition have on our public and private institutions.
Can one ‘learn’ to be a servant leader? Or does personality determine what sort of a leader one will be? There is no ‘ten step plan’ to developing this style of leadership. I have no doubt that there are many people who possess these characteristics have the seeds to become great leaders inside them, if only given the right chance and circumstances. These future leaders can be developed to understand their weaknesses and work to improve in a spirit of service to their organizations. Coaching and mentoring such gifted individuals gives me great personal satisfaction. The world needs more leaders that are willing to question, listen, and serve.
