On Leadership

Much has been written about leadership, starting with the question of whether it is innate or developed over time. By virtue of working at a firm that requires 'leadership', this question has come to occupy a central place in my life. In recent times, as I have honed the academic aspect of my life even further, I have spent much time thinking about leadership. What does leadership mean, especially for an introverted individual such as me? Is leadership bravado? Is leadership visibility? Is leadership passion?

The answer I came to is that leadership is an idea. Some ideas (such as writing a great thesis) do not require leadership - and that is how it should be! However, to take certain ideas to fruition, one will need to mobilise people around them. That is leadership! I will unabashedly say that I am not a 'natural leader', at least not in the way that the word is commonly used. However, at many points in the past, a particular idea has motivated me enough for me to take a leadership role. One such idea was my idea that a particular organisation I was part of (and influential in) needed to work in a way that was different from status quo. I lead - without ever thinking of it as 'leadership' - a group of peers and juniors to try and bring about that change. I was so consumed by passion for what I was leading towards that this mantle of 'leadership' fell very naturally on me. At other times, and in other organisations, I have been content being a cog (albeit an important one) in the wheel. This is what I have often called my 'model' of leadership, that of leadership by followership. I was inspired by the quote - 'the first follower is more important than the leader.' This aspect of my leadership style has been one of enabling. I do not take center stage, but allow someone else to do that and then back up that person to the hilt.

The point I am making is that, in my experience, leadership is only an outcome of a much larger process of fulfilling an idea. I would feel comfortable knowing that I do not unnecessarily make everything I do a demonstration of leadership. My preference is a 'design-to-value' approach to solving problems. The aim, therefore, is to be great at solving problems - leadership or solitude would be only incidental in this approach.

There is another aspect that I have given a lot more thought to - personal interactions. I believe 'leadership style' is often conflated with how one interacts with people around them. However, I look at these things as completely independent. More so because I try to adopt a holistic and consistent approach while interacting with other people, i.e. treating those 'lower' than oneself in the social hierarchy in the same way as one treats those who are 'higher'. 

Therefore, if one arranges these 'types' in a matrix form, my aim is to move towards the box that implies having a consistent way of dealing with people and a 'design-to-value' approach to leadership.