Leadership Force | Julian Stdd learning blog

I spoke with a group today, doing work ”power“, And they considered that they were uncomfortable with this word. It was uncomfortable, what I understand, because it is not the first group to say that.

We intrinsically like to imagine that our leadership concerns consensus, influence, on “law”, and indeed it is often: in my own research, senior leaders often believe (and the state) that their leadership rarely pushes the direct effort of formal power.

But we cannot expect the idea that leadership is on power – indeed “is”. The leaders “lead” the change, “maintain” the borders, “initiate”. Or “stop” things to happen. The way they do it is very variable, but at heart, the role is to exercise a strength on the system, although sometimes soft.

It is really the nature of organizations: they are not just collectives. These are useful collectives. Thus, even if decision -making is devoted to the widest community, this is always a power exercise.

I take a pragmatic line with this, in the work published in the book “Power and Potential”, considering that we live in several simultaneous power systems, each with a different border, and each operating through different mechanisms. But overall, between our formal and social authority, we hold power.

I suppose that this replenishment in the reasons why we seek to “develop” leaders: to give them more power, or to help them understand what they already have, in several assorted systems, and to find their own position and style in the way they use it.

In this, I agree with my group: you can be a leader who almost does not exercise power, but your presence alone has an influence on the group, and therefore I maintain that leadership is ultimately power. Even when he is kind.