Leadership for the Past, Present or Future?
As the choice for the next U.S. President has narrowed Americans are lining up behind three distinct models of leadership.
Many articles have been written about the contrast in leadership styles between Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama. Yet Republican John McCain exhibits, and represents, yet another vision of what constitutes leadership. And each reflects distinct stages in the evolution of the American economy and society.
The Labor-Management Council of Greater Kansas City and Rockhurst University have, for more than 20 years, sponsored a unique leadership development program. Bringing up-and-coming leaders together not only from both labor and from management bur from all organizational levels, the Mid-Level Leadership Program has graduated more than 250 participants. We have studied not only the “usual suspects” in leadership analysis and research but also our own participants to keep the program relevant.
Drawing upon a variety of sources, we developed a way of looking at how our views of leadership have evolved over the past 160 years and how they might evolve further in the future. Like all such models there is oversimplification and overlap. Yet this model provides a guide to help us determine where we fit as leaders, or what we must change to be more effective. We see three different stages of U.S. economic and social development that created different leadership needs and thus differing models of effective leadership:
Industrial Revolution Post Oil Crisis Information Revolution
1840s-1970s 1970s-1990s 21st Century
Concepts that Describe
Mechanistic Electronic Biological
Dictatorship Oligarchy Democracy
Work for Survival Work for Advancement Work for Spiritual Development
Command & Control Direction/Experimentation Vision/Learning Organization
Segmentation Specialization Integration
Focus of Business
Profit-maximization, short-term Profit-maximization, long term Financial stability, long term
Owners of Capital Professional Management Stakeholders
Relationship to Society
Laissez-Faire Regulation Partnership
Darwin Lobbying Collaboration/Win-Win
Closed System Open system at bottom Diversity
View of Workers
As machines; disposable As children As adults
Apply bodies Apply skills Apply minds
Leadership Traits
Strong-willed Strategic Visionary
Authoritarian Packager Enabler
Intimidating Charismatic Healer
Man Who Acts Man Who Thinks Person Who Listens
Hoards Power Collects Power Distributes Power
Knows All Knows Experts Always Learning
As you examine the three presidential contenders, it is remarkable how closely each one’s distinct style fits with a different era. Look at the above chart: McCain, the tough-talking war hero, fits our traditional leadership image of the guy who will save/protect us; Clinton the professional who will fight for and take care of us, and Obama the visionary who inspires us to solve our problems together.
Our candidate preference likely reflects the kind of world we either see or would prefer, and thus the kind of leader we expect to be the most effective.
McCain has the advantage of fitting the leadership model that has been most prevalent in our culture and often our workplaces. His disadvantage is that it is also a leadership style often seen as irrelevant to 21st century America, and as closely matching the approach taken by an unpopular President Bush. Clinton is the more recognizable model in terms of our contemporary experience with leaders, who have moved beyond the traditional model yet continue a focus on making us feel secure. However, this style also seems cumbersome and uninspiring to many who are familiar with it and to those who aspire to a different future. Obama best fits the leadership style of the future but change is difficult for humans and thus his approach is hard for some to accept or trust.
The choice America makes will not only reveal its preferred political solutions, but also how we believe the world does or should work. Is a return to the past our best hope? A better version of the present our pragmatic choice? Or are we ready to tackle the future? The decision made by U.S. voters will eventually be reflected in business, labor, nonprofits and other sectors of our society, as it will define the reality we want to make and the kind of leader best able to make that happen.