Codswallop
Codswallop, codswallop… I enjoy the way it rolls off my tongue.
It is a combination of letters and sounds that tell us something of its meaning even before we hunt through the dictionary.
I shall leave this as a little assignment for those who are unfamiliar with the 1960’s English-bred word.
Here is a hint.
The above-quoted statement by a South African sports’ journalist, that a certain person’s attributes ordain them from birth to be a leader, is codswallop.
An aside. Those who have completed the Alpha Programme will recognise that we use blue text for a very special reason, as I do in the infographic.
Before I get to my point, let me clarify that in this Note I am not shooting the messenger (the journo, even if they have succumbed to sloppy ideas), and I am certainly not pointing a gnarled finger at the said born leader. He did not say he is a born leader; he is merely a prop in the story.
Furthermore, the ideas of ‘born leaders’ and ‘natural leaders’ and ‘personality-based leaders’ (and even ‘gender-based leaders’) is so rife that few would be left standing if all had to be called out for using such references.
It is precisely because such terms and notions are used so frequently that it is easy to imagine such ideas are legitimate, accurate and credible, even if with slight contemplation we know they are not.
I make two main points.
- Firstly, let us test my assertion that this idea is codswallop. Don’t take my word for it, go to first principles and reason.
- If some people are born to lead, others are not. And, we can surmise that only a few are so born.
- If someone is born to lead but does not lead, how do we know they are leaders if they don’t lead? Is a person who is born to lead still a leader if they don’t lead? What does ‘to lead’ mean?
- How do we know someone is a leader? Do they have a birthmark, are they male and large and fully voiced, or wealthy bosses? Do they have powerful armies? Do they spend a lot of energy telling others what to do?
- If some people are born leaders, are other people born neurosurgeons, plumbers, and yet others cyclists? If we saw the following words in a news article, what would we imagine?
Pauline’s attributes as a born airline pilot will reassure her passengers (even if she has not yet been to flight school). She will be Captaining an Airbus A380 from KL to DC this evening. Welcome aboard…
-
- If we are born to our skills and capabilities, should we bother learning, gaining knowledge and honing them through diligent practice?
- If I have once done something that others imagine is ‘being a leader’ does that make me a leader forever? Like, once saved always saved.
- If there are only born leaders (you either are or are not), why do millions of people all over the planet spend billions of dollars every year learning leadership at schools, universities, business schools and leadership guru programmes? Are they crazy? Are these places peddling snake oil?
Alright.
Eight points are enough here. If these are unconvincing, more will not suffice.
- Secondly, let us think about those who are supposedly not-born-leaders.
- Following on from the previous points – there are only a few born leaders amongst humankind, so most are not-born-leaders. BTW, most of those born to lead happen to be amongst males, the humans with lots of testosterone. The other 49% produce just about none…
- As those born to lead know they are, do those not born to lead know it too? If you are not born to lead, don’t!
- Here is the most unproductive outcome of the ‘not-born-to lead’ idea.
-
-
- On 27 August 2023 there are 8,056,741,358 living humans.
- For the sake of the argument, let us guess that there is one born leader for every 1,000 not-born-leaders. The born-leader theorists might tell us that these folk are rare indeed, perhaps only one in 10,000 people, or maybe one in 100,000 or even one in a million…
- If 99.9% of humans are NOT (born) leaders then 8,048,684,617 people can just get on with their lives, expecting the 0.1% (eight and a bit million) to do the job of leading – making decisions about everyone’s life.
- When a person is told or it is made part of their underlying philosophy, culture and thinking, that they are on the outside, that they have not been chosen to be born with some grand gift, they check out. They check out from having personal responsibility; they are indifferent, they are devoid of self-efficacy.
- The consequence of such thinking and culturalisation is the wholescale undermining and theft of people’s social agency. Eight billion people are doomed to the ‘leadership’ of the few chosen ones. Eight billion people are deemed to have no social agency—that they cannot think critically, that they make no smart choices and cannot act with productive purpose.
- It is true, they might not exercise social agency, but it is not that they cannot, they often don’t because they don’t take ownership of their self-efficacy and social agency!
- This is simply wrong on all counts.
-
The foundation of influential leadership is the triad of our social agency, that each of us can think critically, choose smartly and act purposefully for productive outcomes.
Leaders are born as much or as little as any other professional capability.
As an Apex Skill, leadership can only be exercised through learning, knowledge and practice.
The crux of the matter is, of course, whether we equip ourselves to activate our social agency, and then choose to lead.
If you have been on the Influential Leadership Alpha Journey you know that each of us is responsible to play the cards of life that the universe deals us—whatever hand we receive.
Each person can choose to be able to lead.
Once equipped, we can lead.
If you have not yet embarked on the Alpha Journey, you can choose to be able to lead.
Regards,
Colin @ Karoo
Influential Leadership Equips People to Lead!
Leadership Weekly Note: 3523. 280823
e: colind@karoo.world
Follow The Karoo Influential Leadership on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/KarooInfluentialLeadership
