I’ve come across this graphic a lot on the web, used for various “leadership” sites. The artist really does a nice job of representing what seems to be the prevailing perception of what leadership is…and misperception of what good leadership is.Oh, there are plenty of historical and current leaders that this graphic illustrates perfectly. One from the 1930′s comes to mind.

But really look at that graphic. [for ease of typing, I'm going to use the generic male gender. But, as we know, this applies to both living genders with equal measure.] Is this a guy a good leader? This guy is a pain in the hind quarters; a burden. This is a picture of the proverbial “genius with a thousand helpers.” They are there to serve him, to help him achieve his goals, to make him happy. They aren’t focused on the mission; they are focused on the boss. They probably don’t know what it is they’re out to achieve other than, “go that way, now.” And next month it will be, “no, go that way.”

No way is this guy ever going to let go of any of his perks. Are you kidding? “I am charismatic!” “I have vision.” “I have skills.” “I am great.” Actually, if we’re going to be honest, this guy in this graphic is a joke. A charlatan; a supercilious prig.

This is the perfect illustration for some individual leaders…and their organizations or masses who support them…often out of sheer dependency. And that’s often by design. It is a great picture of many organizations: top-heavy, servants to the king, submissive to position authority.

Oh, this is a picture of leadership, alright. But is it good leadership or bad leadership? This guy loves being the boss, and he will make absolutely certain that every subordinate is reminded that they are subordinate in order to protect his position and power. This is not about leading. This is the egocentric power game. And guess what, lest we miss this point: this represents leadership teams as much as it does individuals.

This mindset is a dangerous one, especially if implicitly reinforced by “leadership training” or studies which focus too much on the individual. Leadership is not about “me,” nor about what I should “do,” ie., skill-sets. It’s about what must be accomplished.

And so, today I decided to whip up my own rough rendition of this scene.

Now then. What do we see here? “We have potential.” “We are great.” “We have vision.” This guy is not interested in perks or recognition. This guys is focused entirely on what must be accomplished for the team. And they probably know more about where they are going and why, than “go there now.” It’s more likely “we’ve got to get there to achieve the following.” And if this guy falls, or gets sick, or retires, the team is prepared…battle-ready…to carry on with the mission.

You know, the leader working in this bottom image may well have been “that guy” up above in previous days as a less mature leader. More probable yet is that he was once one of those subordinates who witnessed good leadership in action and “gets it.”

Which of these suggests Control and which Leadership? Which is the picture of Selflessness, Integrity, and Courage? Who do you trust? Who would you follow in combat?

What role are you playing in the team? You’re either part of the team, or you are not. You’re either showing good leadership, or you are showing bad leadership.

And we’d better watch the implications of what we “teach” regarding leadership. This is precisely why we at Trident Leadership make very clear that we are not interested in “teaching how to be a good leader,” but rather focus on developing a mindset of “what must be accomplished by good leadership, right now” and why you must take action now. No excuses.

Look at the graphics above. One seems to be overly fascinated with the “mystical individual” of a leader-type. Those poor folks down there aren’t impressed; they’re exhausted and alienated. The other is focused on what “good leadership” must accomplish. One is self-focused; the other is not. One is an exclusive club that belongs to the “charismatic” or powerful few; the other is not. One emphasizes leadership as a skill-set; the other, a mindset, placing the skill-sets into context.

I think that this mindset represents what we must guard against when we’re discussing leadership. I think we should, instead, emphasize, “get your sights off yourself and onto the team and the mission, then kick in and press the attack.” If we focus less on trying to “be” the perfect leader and get busy showing good leadership…then maybe we’ll end up being effective leaders after all.

Don’t just “be” something; achieve something.