Most American children, through school and the media, characterize  the participatory democracy of the United States as epitomizing equality. Furthermore, they are taught that political leaders, like the president, represent their rights as citizens and are therefore ideal leaders. I question how valid and compatible these notions are in light of the mudslinging and political pandering that occurs during today’s elections. This, of course, is not to take away from the accomplishments of men like Senators McCain and Obama. Both possess many of the qualities necessary to lead the free world. In politics, however, they often partake in a process that is essentially below them. Though each of them has the capacity to become one of history’s great leaders, they will have to forever battle against the political blemishes or gaffes on their records.

This brings me to the critical question: Can  a modern US politician serve as a model of exemplary leadership or does the game of politics inhibit leadership potential? When it comes to identifying the truly profound leaders in history, there is little to no argument when names like Nelson Mandela or Mahatma Gandhi arise. On the other hand, even when traditionally popular presidents like John F. Kennedy (JFK) are mentioned, someone will be able to cite a political stance that aims to negate his qualities as a transcendent leader. Looking into the future, I see less of a chance, especially under the now watchful eyes of the media and Internet, that future American politicians will ever be mentioned in the same breath as JFK or Franklin Delano Roosevelt.        – Jim Meehan

One of our regular contributors to CLD is Peter Mello.  He is an incredible thinker and has recently developed a website focused on leadership.  You will want to bookmark the Weekly Leader if you want access to news, tools, resources, media and a host of other resources. Check it out – it is an incredible contribution to the field. - Scott J. Allen

According to a report issued yesterday (October 15, 2008) by The Center for Public Leadership at the Harvard Kennedy School and the Merriman River Group, political consultants, Americans’ confidence in their leaders across nearly all sectors has sharply declined over the past year. In particular, confidence in President George W. Bush and his advisers took another negative turn with 60% expressing “not much” or “no” confidence, a sharp decline from 49% in 2007.

The Executive Branch of government sat at the bottom of the 2008 National Leadership Index while the Military, Medical and Nonprofit sectors took the top three spots respectively.

Confidence in the leaders of seven sectors (business, the Executive Branch, Congress, religious, educational, the Supreme Court and state government) fell more sharply in the last year than ever before.  Only leaders from the Military and Medical sectors rated above the Moderate confidence level.

Despite their current expressed lack of confidence in the Executive Branch, 77% believe that the 2008 Presidential Election matters a great deal for the future of our country, up from 65% in 2007. High expectations for the next American President for sure.

The research was conducted September 13 – 22, 2008 through random telephone interviews of 997 individuals 18 years of age or older from across the United States.  The complete methodology is summarized in the report which you can download here. This survey is a component of the more comprehensive Leadership Index 2008 which will be available for download on November 24, 2008. Prior National Leadership Index full reports are available for download. (2007, 2006 and 2005)

What does this tell us about the current state of leadership in the United States? Obviously, people are not happy with how our country is being lead in nearly every sector and since the survey was conducted in the middle of the most significant financial crisis America has experienced since the Great Depression, this is not a real surprise. But does it tell us something more important about our nation. Do we look too often to our leaders when we as individuals and collectively might be better situated and more effective at finding solutions to our challenges? Are our leaders really as ineffective as the survey results suggest? Are leaders easily targeted scapegoats? These are not questions easily answered but asking and reflecting on them might be a worthwhile exercise as we enter a challenging new era in our nation’s history.

- Peter A. Mello

Cross posted in Weekly Leader

For some portion of my career I am going to conduct research on non-verbal communication and leadership. For now, it is simply fun to observe and  play around with some ideas and thoughts.  Take a quick look at the following resource and then watch the debate this evening.  What do you see?  I think I will turn off the sound for a time and just watch…I know it will be an interesting activity. – Scott J. Allen

3. Leadership is a relationship between the leader, the followers, and the context. For example, Ronald Reagan was elected president at a time (context) when his personal leadership attributes and his message (leader) aligned with that being sought by the people of the United States (followers). Would President Reagan be elected today? No one knows. However, were he to seek election today, Reagan would need to align his message with issues that mesh with our current reality and context.

Here’s a second example. When John McCain suggested that the “fundamentals of the economy are still strong” he made these comments in a different context than we are in today.  Several institutions and corporations were still intact – today, leaders throughout the world are trying to figure out how to keep their economies afloat. Unfortunately for McCain, his comments would come back to haunt him as the context changed.

I could go on an on. For those sports fanatics out there, you can think of any number of examples as well.

The leader and his or her skills and competencies, the followers and their desires, wants and values in combination with the context in many ways determine success or failure. This is why successful teachers, leaders, coaches, supervisors have great success in one context and not others.

The better we understand the complexities of leadership, the better we can understand the “why” behind our perceptions of effective or ineffective leadership.

So what is effective leadership? It all depends on the context and the leader’s ability to adapt. – Scott J. Allen