In the midst of discussing the qualities needed of a great leader, the point was made that great leaders need to accomplish something—they need to have some degree of success. However, a consensus was not reached on the certain quality they should espouse to be successful. I believe the disagreement stemmed from the negative association to the quality (some might prefer the word vice) of ambition. While I think great leaders need initiative, I find ambition to an essential quality of a great leader, although the extent to which he displays his ambition can—and at times should—be variable.
Initiative is the act of starting something. It’s someone taking her first steps and putting herself out there. And it’s a good thing for leaders to have. However, too much of it—like too much of many qualities—can be a negative. If a person has too much initiative and not enough ambition, he is always starting, always taking those first steps, but never actually following through on his project and goals. In order to truly see something through to completion, she, and all great leaders, needs to be ambitious.
Ambition is rarely portrayed in a positive light. From Machiavelli to Rowling, authors have constantly portrayed open ambition as a negative, as an evil. But in truth, ambition is the drive to achieve something. That something can be hiking the entirety of Mount Nittany, ending the genocide in Darfur, or taking over the world. Ambition often receives scrutiny rather than the act itself. In reality, no one currently chides Abraham Lincoln for his ambition to obtain the president and complete the task of freeing the slaves. Yet, everyone chastises Adolf Hitler for his ambition to wipe out the Jews as well as many others and create a superior Aryan race. The reason is that when the achievement is noble, ambition is swept to the side. But when the achievement is reprehensible, ambition is thrown into the center as a major reason for the ill achievement. In reality, ambition is needed to achieve both good and evil.
The question then rises to the extent that one should display his ambition. Open ambition can often lead to resentment. People tend to view ambition as a self-serving attribute that is only beneficial to person attempting to achieve something. They don’t focus on the act that was accomplished due to ambition—unless the act is a perceived negative one. This would lead to the notion that one should exercise “quiet ambition,” a term that was used in the discussion last Tuesday. In essence, a great leader should not publicize her ambition but have it as a quality that goes unnoticed. This Machiavellian way of thinking can become extremely dangerous though. Leaders are heavily criticized when their public persona doesn’t align with their personal one, but this is mostly when it pertains to policy opinions (e.g. Hillary Clinton’s private 2013 speech where she explained her ‘public’ and ‘private’ position on issues.[1]). If a leader were to have “quiet ambition,” and it was leaked or revealed how they were legitimately ambitious despite what they had publicly espoused, the backlash would probably be immense.
I don’t agree with the notion that “quiet ambition” is necessary. When a child says that she wants to be president, she is not lambasted for her showing of ambition. When a teenager wants to become the head of community service club, he is not chastised for his showing of ambition. When, then, does ambition become a vice to display? It appears ambition may just be a scapegoat virtue that is blamed instead of the true vice. Hitler’s vice wasn’t his ambition, it was his lack of respect for human life and dignity. Hillary’s vice wasn’t that she was ambition for the presidency, it was that she failed to connect with the voters. If the most ambitious people had achievements for the common good, their ambition would hardly be mentioned (e.g. Elon Musk).
Initiative is an important quality for good leaders to have. However, it’s one that is already included in the quality of ambition. If one is ambitious to be successful in her task, she is going to take the intuitive to start that task as well as complete it, as a result of her ambition. I would be remiss if we, as a people, started viewing any ambition as a negative and something great leaders should not possess. Great leaders need success. Great leaders need drive. Great leaders need more than ambition. Great leaders need ambition.
[1] I would like to mention that while Hillary Clinton received a lot of public backlash for this statement, Tim Kaine did not receive as much (if any highly public) criticism for his public and private stance on abortion. This may illustrate the sexism that is practiced in association with the discussion of ambition—which I will not touch on in this blog post.
Daniel,
I’m really glad you made a post about this because I remember thinking very similar thoughts during our class’s discussion about initiative and ambition. Like you said, it seemed as though a lot of people in the discussion associated “ambition” with a negative connotation, like your example of Hitler’s ambition to create a superior Aryan race. This was really interesting to me because I personally have always thought of the word ambition with a positive connotation – when I think of ambitious people, I think of those who are motivated and determined to achieve success that could ultimately benefit themselves and others. However, I do recognize that ambition is one of this those concepts that can be interpreted multiple ways which, again, is why I appreciate you making this post.
Another thing that you pointed out that I think is very important is that it “may be a scapegoat virtue that is blamed instead of the true vice.” When you look at it in this context, you can really understand how ambition is too broad of a term to use to blame someone for their inefficiencies. And if you use it constantly as a scapegoat, then it really does adopt a negative connotation. Meanwhile, which of the greatest leaders of our world didn’t have any ambition? Did Martin Luther King, Jr. or Nelson Mandela or Abraham Lincoln or Oprah Winfrey get to where they were without the strong desire to achieve something great? I agree wholeheartedly with your belief that effective leaders, among other characteristics, should possess some form of ambition.
Thanks for sharing 🙂