Why Do We Lead?

George Washington really, really did not want to be president. After 13 years commanding the Continental Army, he wanted nothing more than “the humble and happy lot of living and dying a private citizen” at his home in Mt. Vernon.

By nature shy and reserved, he hated the limelight. Embarking on the journey to New York for the inauguration, he felt like “a culprit … going to…his execution.”

Washington took up the mantle of leadership out of duty—only because his conscience demanded it. He knew the responsibilities of being the first to lead the newly formed union would be an impossible burden, that his every action would have enormous consequences, and the chances of failure immeasurable.

As he confessed in his inaugural speech, nothing could fill him “with greater anxieties.”

He’d be a terrible politician today. Because he didn’t have those common characteristics of modern politicians: confident in their decisions, eager to be in the limelight, and putting self and party above the country.

Brian Klaas, in his latest newsletter, bemoaning the current state of politics, showed the headlines of the week from four major US news outlets. Each and every story was about the politicians themselves. The politicians were the story—not the issue, not the legislation, not the war, but what the politicians did.

“Politicians are supposed to be vectors to solve our problems,” he writes. They’re not supposed to be the story. We are supposed to be the story.”

But in fact, modern leadership is more about the person than what they produce. We are culprits in this because we’re suckers for a hero story. We worship celebrities, idolize athletes, and revere CEOs.

We gush over the genius of Steve Jobs and Elon Musk, emulating their habits, morning routines, and mannerisms, hoping that doing so will lead us down the path to prosperity.

But leadership should be about what you do, what you achieve, and what you enable for others. Andy Grove, former CEO of Intel, called it high output management—getting things done through the people on your team.

In fact, the one variable that should be used to determine the performance of a leader is the quality of the people they lead.

Yet, research shows that the managers who are seen to perform better, those getting the most rapid promotions and pay raises, are actually the least productive and least effective.

They perform the role of leader better than their peers but aren’t practicing leadership. They can self-promote, network, and make a good impression but don’t deliver results.

Which leaders deliver results? The ones who actually occupy the leadership role, not just perform it. They create great things by creating great teams.

So, if we did judge leadership by output, and not by charisma, performative acts, or self-promotion, then being a leader would require, among all the other skills and competencies:

Surrounding yourself with great people

Leaders are only as good as the people around them. They need to be unafraid of surrounding themselves with smart people, experts, and people who may know better than they do.

People with integrity, people unafraid to speak up, those who can put aside their egos, join together with others to support something bigger and more important than their immediate well-being.

Psychotherapist Esther Perel says that “The quality of your life ultimately depends on the quality of your relationships . . . which are basically a reflection of your sense of decency, your ability to think of others, your generosity.”

And the same can be said of the quality of your leadership. The quality of your leadership should be judged by what the people who work for you say about you. At 93, Warren Buffett puts a fine point on it: “If you get to my age in life and nobody thinks well of you, I don’t care how big your bank account is, your life is a disaster.”

Elevating the role

The New Zealand All Blacks have 15 mantras they live by, and one of them is “Be a good ancestor.” They know that their responsibility is to protect and enhance the reputation of the team, not just promote their individual glory. They’re meant to ‘play for the name on the front of the shirt, not the back.’

As long as they wear the jersey, their mandate is to leave that jersey in a better place for the player who follows them.

Elevating the role means your actions enhance the reputation of the team, organization, or role. You serve in the role in order to make it better, to leave it in better shape for the person who follows you.

Practicing Self-restraint

Your ego is a sitting duck for the seduction of power. Being in a role of power is heady and intoxicating. The context you’re in is teeming with temptations and indulgences, seducing, distracting, and disorienting you. Power feeds on your stress, your triggers, your self-deception. People cater to your moods and outbursts, enable your excesses, and excuse your mistakes. All of which reduces your need to exercise restraint and weakens your self-discipline.

To not get lost in a leadership role, you need to be prepared and strengthened for this seduction. Ulysses ordered his crew to tie him to the mast so he wouldn’t be enticed by the siren’s song. That is a metaphor for self-restraint against the temptations that lead you astray.

Self-restraint in the exercise of power is critical. It’s what we need to uphold laws, maintain order, and keep our organizations and our country intact. It’s what makes democracy work. A paradox of power is that to wield it effectively, you have to use it lightly.

You are not meant to indulge in the very freedoms that power grants you.

It’s not about you. It’s the people whom you enable, the role you’re serving, and greater good your promoting and protecting.

And it isn’t easy because there really is something heroic in doing that well. And because we’re human. We do have egos, and we do get tempted. And that is precisely why we’re only as good as the people we choose.

Thanks for reading.