The Right Stuff….Maybe…Maybe Not!

Greetings and Salutations,

Last week when I began this blog on leadership, I presented an overview of some of the traits and definitions used to described leaders.  In week number two, I want to delve further into building our leader from the ground up.  Yes we are going to construct "leaders," good and bad, and talk about the trails and tribulations associated with the manufacturing process.  First, I would like to go back in time and reflect on movies that depict leadership from a Hollywood standpoint.  This will kind of lay our groundwork on which we build our leaders.

In 1983, Philip Kaufman wrote the screenplay and directed the classic film, The Right Stuff, which was a non-fictional retelling of NASA's experiences pursuing manned space travel and the dangers and advancements that resulted from those experiences.  What the film depicted was Leadership Theory 101, albeit not the actual intent of the story, but it stumbles across this subplot as the story of man versus machine, and man versus science takes place.  Think about this for a moment, you have test pilots yearning to break various speed records and fly higher and faster than any person before in the history of the world.  In order to accomplish this, you have to have people who are not only intelligent, but brave, self-confident, knowledgeable, possess varying degrees of interpersonal skills, and subject to taking risks.  Hmmmm, that sounds a lot like trait leadership theory.  In the film, for example, Project Mercury could not have produced the national heroes we have today if these men did not possess the leadership traits needed to defy the odds and help the United States surge past its cold war rival, The Soviet Union, and eventually make it to the moon.

In 1987, Stanley Kubrick embraced us with the dehumanizing affects of war in his classic film, Full Metal Jacket.  The film centers on Private J.T. Davis played by Matthew Modine, known more affectionately as "Private Joker."  It follows the development of this young Marine from boot camp through the end of his service during the Vietnam War.  Here again, this film accidentally explores Leadership Theory 201 as the many characters in the film display varying degrees of leadership; and in some cases situational leadership.  Private Joker takes on the role as an emergent leader as he helps struggling Private Lawrence played by Vincent D'Onofrio.  R. Lee Ermey, the repressive Gunnery Sargent Hartman, displays assigned leadership using coercive power as he physically punishes the recruits during boot camp.  Arliss Howard who played the character, Private Cowboy, displays assigned leadership with legitimate power as he leads his troops (later in the movie) to take on a sniper who was killing his platoon of Marines during an ambush.  I have probably seen this movie a dozen times and never thought of it from a leadership standpoint, but at every turn, each character at some point is assigned a leadership position, takes a leadership position, or emerges as a leader when the time presents itself.  Let's take a look at a perfect example of assigned leadership and the use of coercive power in the famous "jelly doughnut" scene featuring R. Lee Ermey and Vincent D'Onofrio (language warning):
 

In each of these films, the leaders display something we often call the "right stuff."  They either have it or they don't.  But do all leaders really have the right stuff naturally, or can they develop it over time; can they learn it?  Let's step away from R. Lee Ermey's abusive Gunnery Sergeant character for a second and consider other things a leader can possess or lack.  Can a leader be empathetic for example?  Can a leader be short in stature?  Can a leader be a "C" student, or one who dropped out of school altogether?  Can a leader not be extroverted, or break out in sweats when addressing large crowds?  Sure, maybe, maybe not?!  Two prevailing schools of thought, trait leadership theory and skill leadership theory, make attempts to explain what makes a leader, but they may be two sides of the same coin.

If for example, all leadership was developed as a trait, meaning someone was born with it, that would mean that every single person in the world who lacked leadership skills at birth could NEVER be leaders.  Tell that to Bill Gates who dropped out of college.  But if Bill Gates crawled into a corner and hid every time he faced others, Microsoft would not be the business juggernaut it is today.  You see, he still has to possess some traits that make him an effective leader that he may have been born with, and it is very likely he learned the others.  However, Bill Gates has always had one special thing that made him a de facto great leader.  He possesses information power meaning he has information that others want or need!  That, my friends, is going to be the leadership and power grab of the future.  Those who have information over those who don't, but need it.  I even addressed this phenomenon in another blog during my e-Governance course at Troy University known as the digital divide.  The most powerful part of any organization is arguably its information technology department.  With one key stroke, the organization can be brought to its knees.  Now THAT is power, but not necessarily leadership!  Think about THAT for a moment.   Before I close though, I believe it is important that we understand that leadership and power are closely related, but they are not the same thing.  Next week for my third installment, we want to start addressing behavioral approaches to leadership.  That'll be interesting!  Until next week, take care of yourselves.