As South Africa’s first Black President, Nelson Mandela provided his country the profound leadership it needed to unite and move from its unjust apartheid past into a more peaceful future. A brief analysis of his leadership qualities shows him to perfectly embody the five characteristics developed by George (as cited in Northouse, 2016, p. 197) of an authentic leader: he understood his purpose, was a man of incredibly strong values, was able to establish trusting relationships, was self-disciplined, and acted from the heart. We will look at how he displayed each characteristic.

 

He Understood His Purpose

Mandela seems to have been driven by one purpose: abolishing apartheid and establishing racial equality in his country. Beginning with his anti-colonial work as a young lawyer in the early 1940s, Mandela began fighting to overthrow the apartheid system put in place in 1948. He was arrested and prosecuted numerous times for his activism for over a decade before being sentenced to life in prison for his role in a campaign to overthrow the white-only National Party government in 1961. After serving 27 years in prison, Mandela was released in 1990. In spite of the hardships he had endured, Mandela’s passion for his life’s purpose was not dimmed. He worked with then President of South Africa F.W. de klerk to officially bring apartheid to its end before being elected President himself in 1994 (Frontline, 1999). 

He Understood His Own Values

According to George (as cited in Northouse, 2016, p. 198), authentic leaders have a “True North”, “know who they are” and “do not compromise their values” when faced with hardship. As Northouse (2016) points out, Mandela valued equality and justice for all citizens of South Africa and was “unyielding in his pursuit” of these. At one point during his imprisonment, Mandela refused to accept an early release because it was predicated on his denouncing his values. He chose to remain in prison, rather than compromise his conscience.

He Established Strong Relationships

In an interview with John Carlin for Frontline, Neville Alexander, a fellow “revolutionary” who was imprisoned with Mandela described being impressed by the future President’s “warmth and genuine interest”, saying, “I learned from him … to give your full attention to your interlocutor, and really take notice of what people are saying, listen to them carefully.” Mandela’s ability to actively listen to the other prisoners, such as Alexander, helped to establish trust among the group even though many of them held differing ideologies on how to get rid of apartheid. Alexander also recalled that Mandela was very open with everyone regarding personal matters such as the rumored infidelity of his wife. Mandela felt that had he not been open about what was happening, his cause would lose credibility (Carlin, 1999). This helped Mandela establish greater understanding with the rest of the group and hone his leadership skills (Northouse, 2016).

He Was Self-Disciplined

Neville Alexander also discussed how Mandela convinced prisoners with more extreme views of the folly of fighting the prison wardens, saying that Mandela convinced them of the need to be proactive instead of reactive, and to strategize in order to transform their terrible living conditions. Through a great deal of self-discipline, the entire group, under the leadership of Mandela, became “model prisoners” and gradually earned a degree of respect from prison guards who began to ease up on some of the more intense restrictions (Frontline, 1999). Developing self-discipline allowed Mandela to exude a calm demeanor and to remain consistent to his values (Northouse, 2016).

He Was Compassionate

The final aspect of George’s (as cited in Northouse, 2016, p. 200) approach to authentic leadership is compassion, or sensitivity to the life stories of others. Considering all that he endured in the name of white supremacy, the task of uniting white Afrikaners with Africans required a great deal of compassion and generosity from President Mandela. His willingness to reconcile with those who upheld apartheid angered many would-be supporters, however Mandela understood the need for reconciliation on both sides in order to build a nation.

 

Nelson Mandela’s transformation from a trouble-making revolutionary, to long-suffering political prisoner, to President of South Africa is not just a story of one man’s determination. It is the story of his evolution as a leader and how he transitioned from a reactive revolutionary to an actual change agent. Mandela’s strength was his authenticity – a trait that earned him the respect of his friends, his captors, and of the world.

 

References

Carlin, J. (Writer), & Bestall, C. (Director). (1999). The Long Walk of Nelson Mandela [Television series episode]. In Fanning, D., deLanero, I. (Producers), Frontline. Boston, MA: WGBH

Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

 

 

Michael Jordan is quoted as saying, “Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships.” Whether or not Jordan is actually the originator of this statement, these words certainly ring true. One need only look to his own record as an example of the importance of teamwork. Almost universally regarded as the greatest basketball player of all time, in just his first season with the Chicago Bulls, Jordan was voted in as an All-Star starter as well as Rookie of the Year. He would go on to revolutionize the game, setting a number of records, some of which remain unbroken to this day and became a cultural icon (NBA Encyclopedia, 2017).

Now, I would not presume to say that a player’s accomplishments are diminished by a lack of titles. However, a player of Jordan’s abilities must certainly aspire to win championships which is why his quote on teamwork is so interesting. In spite of his unparalleled athleticism and skill, Jordan was unable to clinch a championship title for his first six seasons. In fact, it was not until the Bulls began building a championship team with the addition of small forward Scottie Pippen, who would go on to become a Hall of Famer and one of the all-time greats, and power forward Horace Grant that the team truly began to dominate. The combination of Jordan’s dominance, Pippen’s versatility and Grant’s defense brought the Bulls closer and closer to the championship with each season. This speaks to the need for leaders to design and develop teams comprised of competent members who buy in to the spirit of the team and who identify with the team and share its values (Northouse, 2016, p. 369-70).

I would be remiss not to discuss the role head coach Phil Jackson played in the success of the Chicago Bulls during this period. Once again, one of the greatest coaches of all time, Jackson was known for his “zen” methods of coaching. Speaking to Oprah Winfrey in 2013, Jackson mentioned that he encouraged mindfulness from the team – that is, the quality of being present in the moment – in order to develop mental strength, increase focus, and help the team remain in concert with one another on the court (Oprah.com, n.d.). His holistic approach to coaching touched on both functions of team effectiveness from the Hill Model for Team leadership: performance (task accomplishment), and development (team maintenance). Jackson saw to the teams’ physical preparedness and skill, resulting in the overall goal of winning games. However, by focusing on mental strength and keeping the team in tune with one another, he also helped turn the Bulls into a cohesive unit, making them an excellent team that was able to accomplish their shared goal of winning ball games (Northouse, 2016, p. 368). If leadership is the “central driver of team effectiveness”, then Jackson was the ultimate principled leader who was able to influence his team through all four of the processes laid out by Zaccaro, Heinen, and Shuffler: Cognitive, motivational, affective, and coordination. He understood the problems facing the team, turned them into a cohesive unit, gave them the mental tools to handle their stress, and finally, he coordinated the teams’ activities (Northouse, 2016, p. 371). Jackson’s strategizing coupled with the team’s skills led the Chicago Bulls to six NBA Championships from 1989 to 1998.

The history of the Chicago Bulls during the Jordan era is an excellent example of what happens when you take a group of guys playing basketball together and turn them into a team. Viewed through the lens of the team leadership approach, one can see the practicality of the theory – that developing teams with the right combination of skills and monitoring for necessary interventions are vital for team effectiveness. For organizations, individual talent can only take one so far. Leveraging the talent of an entire team though can lead to truly great accomplishments.

 

 

References

NBA Encyclopedia: Playoff Edition. 2017. Retrieved from                 http://www.nba.com/history/players/jordan_bio.html

Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice, 7th Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

SuperSoulSunday. (2013). How Legendary NBA Coach Phil Jackson Taught His Teams Mindfulness.             Retrieved from http://www.oprah.com/own-super-soul-sunday/How-NBA-Coach-Phil-Jackson-Taught-His-Teams-Mindfulness-Video

When studying Goldberg’s (1990) “Big 5” personality traits, researchers Judge, Bono, Ilies, and Gerhardt (2002), found that extraversion was the trait most closely associated with leadership. They concluded that extraversion was the most important trait for effective leaders to possess (as cited in Northouse, p.27). In fact, even when not explicitly stated in a given study on leadership, traits commonly related to extraversion are typically ranked as most desirable for leaders. These are traits such as dominance, self-confidence, sociability and even intelligence. But does all of this research mean that an introverts leadership goals are hopeless?

Until recently, introverts labored under the stereotypes that their introversion meant they disliked being around people, were shy, and incapable of speaking in public. The description most commonly attributed to, and accepted by introverts is the idea that they are drained by too much interaction and must reenergize by retreating to solitude. In a poll of business executives, 65% said that introversion was a liability in the business world, while 96% reported being extroverts. Regardless, it does not follow that extroverts must be better leaders.

In 2014, author Susan Cain delivered a wildly popular TED talk based on her bestselling book, Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking. After her talk became one the fastest TED videos ever to reach one million views, she has been widely credited with changing the perception of introverts. In the years since her book and TED talk, the numbers of people willing to identify as introverts has continued to grow, as the stigma has largely been removed. Today, a quick online search of “introversion and leadership” yields a trove of literature on why introverts actually make better leaders. In one such article in Forbes magazine, author Jennifer Kahnweiler argues that introverts think before speaking, seek depth over breadth in conversations, project calm in times of crisis, articulate their positions better in writing, and, of course, are energized by solitude. All of these characterstics, she claims, make introverts better leaders.

In fact, both extroverts and introverts can be suited to leadership roles. In keeping with the situational approach to leadership, “different situations demand different kinds of leadership” (Northouse, p. 93). In a study of Wharton students, Adam Grant found that both personality types excelled with different types of people. Extroverts were more effective when employees were passive and required a more directive approach. However, when employees are proactive and vocal in their ideas of how to improve work processes, an introvert’s skills were more effective. Grant suggests that while the extrovert’s assertiveness serves him well with passive workers, it tends to stifle proactive employees (Elliott, 2016). According to the situational approach, leaders, regardless of personality type, would be best served by determining the nature of a given task and developmental level of employees before adapting her or her leadership style to the situation. For Grants study, passive employees would benefit from a directive leadership which provides directions, goals, timelines, and shows how goals will be achieved. Proactive employees would then benefit from supportive leadership which involves seeking employee input, and providing social and emotional support (Northouse, p. 94).

As an introvert, it is heartening to see the change in attitudes toward introverted personality types. The fact is, I am more than capable of behaving like an extrovert. As a matter of fact, that is what I am required to do most days when I leave the house. The only difference between myself and a true extrovert is that at the end of the day, I need my quiet time to reenergize. In 1947, psychologist Hans Eysenck coined the term “ambivert”, which lies in the middle of the extrovert and introvert spectrum. Ambiverts are able to more easily adapt their approach to people since they do not lean too heavily in either direction. So, in the quest to discover who makes the better leader – extroverts or introverts – perhaps the answer is neither. Perhaps we all should be channeling our inner ambiverts.

 

References

Elliott, E. (2015). The Reason Introverts Make Better Leaders. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bryan-elliott/the-reason-introverts-mak_1_b_8365272.html

Kahnweiler, J. B. (2009). Why Introverts Can Make The Best Leaders. Forbes Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/2009/11/30/introverts-good-leaders-leadership-managing-personality.html

Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.