Every great leader knows the feeling of being caught up in the momentum of a great cause. True leaders live for those moments and exert every ounce of their ability to push things along toward their ultimate vison. For a leader, there is perhaps nothing more exhilarating than having one's efforts lead to results that are in line with the highest picture the leader
has of his or her self, goal, and vision.
It has been said that trying times reveal a leader's character. Another statement says that "wars make heroes." Certainly there is something to be said for the times themselves being at least a little responsible for presenting opportunities for a leader to thrive. After all, doesn't it make sense that there are hundreds of generals just as capable as the ones who became famous during war time, but never really achieved fame and notoriety because there was no war to make them known?
On the other hand, it also makes sense that a leader can impact those around him or her and even alter the course of events. Certainly a leader's efforts make a difference. As we've discussed at length on this blog, a leader's efforts often have an enormous impact. Who would lead if the efforts of a leader made no difference whatsoever.
Considering these two points of view reveals a paradox. Namely, that events make leaders, but leaders also make events. To what extent is either one of these positions true? To answer that question, I would like to quote from a distinguished professor at USC (in fact, he's USC's President), Steven B. Sample:
"In the course on leadership that Warren Bennis and I teach at USC, we contrast the veiws of Leo Tolstoy, who believed that history shapes and determines leaders, with those of Thomas Carlyle, who believed that leaders shape and determine history. In his epilogue to perhaps the greatest of all novels, War and Peace, Tolstoy argued that kings and generals are history's slaves. That is, Tolstoy believed that leaders merely ride the crests of historical waves which have been set in motion by myriad forces beyond these leaders' control or comprehension. 'Every act of theirs, which appears to them an acto of their own free will," he wrote, 'is in an historical sense involuntary and is related to the whole cause of history and predestined from eternity.'
On the other side is Carlyle, the nineteenth-century British historian and essayist, who was convinced that 'history is the biography of great men,' the greatest of them being kings. The very word king, Carlyle contends, derives from the ancient word can-ning, which means 'alble man.' In Carlyle's view, it is the Ablemen (and Ablewomen) of our species who direct the course of history and determine humanity's destiny.
My experiences as a leader, as well as my study of chaos theory and related phenomena, have led me to a middle ground between Tolstoy and Carlyle. It may well be that our world is largely Tolstoyan, subject to historical forces which no man or woman can fully measure and analyze, and the consequences of which no person can fully predict. Thus, to that extent, leaders are in fact history's slaves. However, I am also convinced that Ablemen and Ablewomen can make a difference in the course of human events; that the decisions of leaders can indeed have a lasting impact on the world; that historical determinism is never totally in control."
Several reflections are warranted here, I think. First, I believe that the truth lies between what Tolstoy represents and what Carlyle proclaims. Secondly, I also believe that we cannot properly have this discussion without considering the fact that our world is governed by its Creator, who somehow all-knowingly directs events to His glory, even while at the same time allowing us free will (another of life's greatest paradoxes). Thirdly, and closely related to the second, I believe that we each have a destiny that God has laid upon our hearts to discover, that when pursued, will undoubtedly make a difference. And fourthly, I believe that the most important thing a leader can do is to seek to make an impact in the lives of other people, to a greater extent than he or she works to influence events. In this way, much of the discussion of how much events affect the leader, or vice versa, recedes into the background; for there can be no doubting the fact that one person can and does make a huge impact in the lives of others. Caring for someone, showing them love, forgiving them, considering their needs, serving them, and the whole host of Biblical requirements falling under the category of "love thy neighbor" are all traits of great leaders, and are all certainly effective in the lives of others. In essence, we may compel events, and sometimes events will compel us, but we can always make a difference in the lives of others.
What do you readers out there think? Do you have any stories or examples that would illustrate this great paradox? I always love hearing from you all!
Welcome to Chris Brady's Blog 
Leave a reply to Tom Manzer Cancel reply